261–270 of 279 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the setter gets called automatically, but now you have to store the object names as strings or in an XML file. How is that better?
Loose coopling?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
See: Flux .. I'm partial to the Yahoo implementation myself, which has a really good client-server story behind it. React would be the "View" system in the Flux workflow. You are correct that React alone won't replace Angular, but with other tools (Ampersand, Flux, etc) you can use the pieces that you want and put them together. It's the difference between a library and a framework.
Just looked at the flux presentation from facebook, and it seems to me that it's basically a set of best practice on how to wire your view actions to your controller's model and refresh. Having a single unidirectionnal "loop" model=>view=>action=>model... is something that i have been doing inside my angular controllers for a while... Now react may help with the performances of refreshing the dom in that scenario, bu…
I do find that the flux model makes more sense to me. Flux is a set of best practices, they use React for the rendering/view portion, and since their talks there have been several implementations of the workflow. Some using Ampersand or Backbone, others implementing their own pieces. Now Facebook has been releasing their own implementation...
It's all pretty interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Yeah I heard of Angular a long time ago, but then everyone started using it in the last year. What happened? Did they change something that all of the sudden made it popular?
I think it really comes down to more developers actually embracing JavaScript and the tools that the system offers. I think the JS renaissance is upon us, and that's what has people looking to Angular, Flux/React, Meteor and other new frameworks and tooling.
I am literally working on a new project, starting to code the front end as of a day ago... I using Flux+React (nearstack.io, plug) around the Yahoo implementation of Flux's model. The down side, is this will be how things are for the next 3-5 years for the life of the site/application. Angular 2 looks really cool... they seem to be embracing the shadow-dom concepts (like polymer) as well as es6-style import directive…
FWIW, React will be in ES6 (with native classes and imports) before they tag 1.0. In fact, React 0.12 has some breaking changes to prepare for that transition.
It's also safe to say this is just too big of a change without public commentary. Way too big.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been using Vue.js recently, it's a lot like Angular (inspired by?), without all the crazy nonsense: http://vuejs.org/api/
Is it really comparable? The two-way binding is just a small part of Angular and not something you use that often in most applications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. There is virtually no way you can smoothly upgrade an Angular 1 project to this. You'd have to redo most of it from scratch. There are a lot of huge projects that are built on Angular 1 -- many enterprise products too. And this is a huge blow to maintenance. It might be a reason for a lot of people dropping Angular and going for something that makes more business sense. Maybe it's React's time to shine.
The thing with React is that either Facebook's engineers are incredibly prescient or lucky. React very is really well designed and feels natural with ES6. It's so incredibly designed, even without the ES6 optimizations of 0.12.0 (coming soon) you can code today in ES6 (I use 6to5 with JSX transformer harmony just in case).
Facebook also has members on TC39 and is quite involved with evolving the language.
Even though this is still called "Angular", this new version has barely any resemblance with the previous one, it's really a totally new framework. It's a bit sad to think that all this knowledge I have of Angular 1 is now obsolete but I'm excited to dive into this new framework. If it's half revolutionary as Angular 1 was, it's going to be a pretty interesting time.
> the framework will be “drastically different looking”, meaning users will need to get to grips with a new kind of architecture. It’s also been confirmed that there will be no migration path from Angular 1.X to 2.0.
> Currently Angular is aiming for a release by the end of 2015 – but early 2016 seems more realistic given the drastic changes that are planned.
This essentially makes investing in Angular pointless, when there are far more capable and easier to learn frameworks out there - Meteor primarily, and also Derby.js, though it's got about 1/10th of the momentum of Meteor, which launched 1.0 two days ago, and had 20k GitHub stars without backing from some giant company. BTW, Meteor never broke compatibility with earlier releases in such drastic ways as Angular will.