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

Angular 2 Core

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 279 posts

Re: Angular 2 Core

#221

Post by DCoder »

WorldWideWayne wrote: post #135
davidholmesnyc wrote: post #92

I 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…

I've been using Knockout.js and it's wonderful. Way better than Angular, which is too opinionated for me. I can read the entire source code and understand it.

I'm a fan of Knockout too, but it only handles part of Angular's functionality. It doesn't do routing, DI, resources... and you have to build all that from other libraries.

Re: Angular 2 Core

#222

Post by dodyg »

baddox wrote: post #214
dodyg wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not an upgrade if your old stuffs stop working. Man, 1.0 used to mean something.

What did 1.0 used to mean? I thought that major version upgrades typically mean that backwards-incompatible API changes have been made.

It used to mean that it is stable and it will carry on working as far as it can to the future major versions or until it is end of line of the product.

So I can understand if Angular 1.0 stopped working on Angular 4.0 or 5.0. Breaking apps just on one major revision number is really a bad way to manage frameworks.

Re: Angular 2 Core

#223

Post by dodyg »

GhotiFish wrote: post #207
dodyg wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not an upgrade if your old stuffs stop working. Man, 1.0 used to mean something.

Really? Well when it came to programs, one used to expect that older versions of the files used with that program would themselves be upgraded, or would just work. However, when it comes to languages, the major version number is used to indicate breaking changes. So where does angular lie on that continuum?

You are probably thinking Python 2 and Python 3. For languages like C#, you can compile C# 1.0 code on C# 6.0 compiler mostly just fine. I bet this applies to C as well.

Re: Angular 2 Core

#224

Post by crucialfelix »

zghst wrote: post #152
realusername wrote: post #47

I'm quite disappointed by this presentation, I see only new syntax everywhere for approximately zero benefit. There is not even any mention to the Object.observe integration which would be the most exiting feature to improve Angular apps. Angular looks and feels now like a Java framework, with ugly decorators and bloated APIs, that's really sad...

Ever since reading Angular 2's goals, I put 2 and 2 together, the API was definitely going to have to change massively to accommodate ES6. I'm sure they're using Object.observe it just wasn't mentioned in the presentation.

Object.observe is ES7

Re: Angular 2 Core

#226

Post by Joeri »

andybak wrote: post #200
nobleach wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sometimes I think Angular is mainly popular because it's supported by Google. If any regular developer made these drastic changes in HTML with non valid tags and attributes people would not be happy with that project. This is a pretty interesting statement and I want to give it more thought. I've used Angular on plenty of projects and admittedly, It's felt a bit dirty to go back to spaghetti DOM that we worked for…

> All the books were saying to separate logic from our views It doesn't matter what the books say. Or rather - you've got to understand the reason for the advice - not just learn to follow the advice. Programming abounds with maxims. However you can't capture a complex truth with a glib catchphrase. Everyone is trying to achieve the same ends - ease of development without sacrificing maintainability (to give a very s…

Exactly. There is almost no advice in programming which applies to all situations. The trick is knowing when not to follow the advice, and that cannot be explained in a one-liner.

Or, as the tao of programming says:

There once was a Master Programmer who wrote unstructured programs. A novice programmer, seeking to imitate him, also began to write unstructured programs. When the novice asked the Master to evaluate his progress, the Master criticized him for writing unstructured programs, saying, "What is appropriate for the Master is not appropriate for the novice. You must understand Tao before transcending structure."

Re: Angular 2 Core

#227

Post by fetbaffe »

pedalpete wrote: post #10

I'm not sure I've seen a framework with such a drastic API change, particularly such a young API. I find that very threatening. Having spent a considerable amount of time learning and working with Angular.js, not only does this appear to be massively breaking changes, but it would also break 3rd party directives which has been a great benefit to building the Angular community. This makes me think that Angular didn't…

They have do it otherwise Angular will end up the elephants' graveyard like yui, dojo, extjs, javascriptmvc, cappuccino etc.

The problem is of course that this will lead to a big divide between 1.x and 2.x that eventually will undermine the entire project like what happened in python and Volapück.

Re: Angular 2 Core

#228

Post by fetbaffe »

nilliams wrote: post #127
kyllo wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, if an instance of House requires a Door it is not enough to just require('Door'). You still have to do the equivalent of `new Door()` in your House module to get an instance. By doing so within the House module you just tightly coupled House to Door (your House now knows how to create Doors). So what? What is so bad about House and Door being "tightly coupled"? Here's a House constructor that can take an…

What you just wrote as a code example is Dependency Injection, it's just manual dependency injection as opposed to using an IOC container or any of the mechanisms Angular provides. I am very much in favour of the approach you posted. That's exactly how I write my code (I don't currently use Angular), but yep ... that's DI. As James Shore said 'Dependency Injection is a 25-dollar term for a 5-cent concept'. [1]. What…

I remember the first time I heard the term Dependency Injection. I sounded really advanced and I felt like a fool not knowing about. Like have been living under a rock for last years.

When I realized it was "passing stuff in" I wanted to shout, I have done that for years!

Re: Angular 2 Core

#229

Post by fetbaffe »

pavlov wrote: post #53
colinramsay wrote: post #38

Earlier 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?

Angular is attractive to "strategic technologists" because it's rich in ceremony, edifice and nomenclature inspired by the European Union. A platform like this achieves critical mass when it starts appearing in McKinsey slides, and then it will become a permanent fixture in job ads for the next 10 years. I guess Angular has reached that milestone.

The enterprise folks have arrived to ruin everything. Run, just run!

Re: Angular 2 Core

#230

Post by Cthulhu_ »

davidholmesnyc wrote: post #92

I 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…

> On most projects handlebars and correct proper design patterns in code is enough to keep HTML out of javascript and keep basic organization.

Yes, but as a team you have to come up with a correct proper design pattern like that, and get everyone to follow that. I've done that in a Backbone project (which we're moving to Angular atm), and it's a lot of work - not to mention you feel like you're re-inventing the wheel there. AngularJS is a lot more opinionated about how your application should be built, which for new team members is very useful - they don't have to learn Backbone + your own application design, but just AngularJS.

And in large projects / large teams, this is important.

Post reply on HN