As if we didn't have enough reason to move on from Angular. Now you need to learn Typescript to contribute or grok the source files?
That's why I only use assembly. Why would I bother learning C? Now I have two problems!
Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
131–140 of 235 posts
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#132Yay! I have tested TypeScript in hobby projects with a very positive experience. I have actually used typescript together with angular once. I was very disappointed when angular announced that they were going to make some kind of fork, for the runtime annotations they needed, instead of working together.
Until they tret null values as a separate type, I'm with Facebook Flow.
Although I haven't tried Flow, I have taken a glance at it's Maybe Types. I don't think that it is possible to work around libraries and browser APIs returning nulls, and undefined seems to be completely ignored. I think if you want to get rid of null/undefined then you have to use a complete different language, something like Elm, but I would welcome being proven wrong.
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#133Are there any organized efforts to fork the 1.x branch to sustain existing applications?
Not so much to fork, but Angular 1.x is continuing to be developed and Pete Bacon Darwin has taken over as the technical lead: https://plus.google.com/+IgorMinar/posts/2Uo6yh4AV7L Angular 1.4 is well underway and there's a lot of good stuff coming out of it, for example the reworked router module.
FYI the new router module (https://github.com/angular/router) is going to be a separate project, with semver'ed releases. It'll expose bindings for both Angular 1.x and Angular 2, but it isn't bound to the Angular release cycle.
Here's a presentation from ng-conf today about the new router: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vecg70fPDFw
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#134"Special shout out to Yehuda Katz, who helped us design the annotation+decorator proposal which helped make this work possible." How in the world does this man keep up with all these projects? He needs to write a book on motivation.
> How in the world does this man keep up with all these projects? He needs to write a book on motivation. By dumping them mid-way and getting to the next shiny one? Anybody knows how this RoR kickstarter project finally went?
coldtea, you just got served.
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How in the world does this man keep up with all these projects? He needs to write a book on motivation. By dumping them mid-way and getting to the next shiny one? Anybody knows how this RoR kickstarter project finally went?
Yep. I shipped Tokaido and people use it. It was mentioned on Ruby Weekly last week. You can get releases at https://github.com/tokaido/tokaidoapp/releases . Andres (who now maintains the project) released Tokaido for Ruby 2.1 (with support for Mavericks) recently and we're working on Ruby 2.2 support as we speak. The org is here: https://github.com/tokaido/ and there are a number of auxiliary projects (muxr and toka…
You're a machine Yehuda.
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have specifically avoided angular because I feel like it's a monster in that you are so tied to learning and understanding it's proprietary system. I too have moved directly to react. Can anyone comment on how the skills learned by learning Angular can be applied any where else?
You're 100% right. Once you're in Angular-land you are completely tied to the framework. You don't think about "how can I make X in my domain happen?" you think about "how do I make X in Angular happen". This coupled with the horrific Angular docs make it really tough to justify using from a productivity standpoint. I've moved to React as well and feel it's a 10x boost in productivity because I'm constantly thinking…
This will not be the case at all with Angular2. Most of the "angular" stuff will be in annotations and your code is going to be vanilla ES6 for the most part (well, with TypeScript). So, you actually are going to have a lot more freedom to mix and max other technologies.
Also, FYI, the barrier in 1.x is not that high, either. There are many integrations between Angular and other frameworks (including React, FYI).
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
It probably is if you have to deal with > 25k LOC code base like what Angular has.
Well, there's their problem... Edit: Ok, for the down voters. Angular is HUGE. And all that code has to get shoved onto the client side when someone visits a page. And that's JUST for the framework. We aren't even talking about the application code yet. More and more clients are mobile. Nobody sees a problem here? You're using more (precious) data, it's slower to load and slower to run. It's just a nasty little trend…
Only if you have caching disabled. If you use a CDN, the library is likely already on the users computer. That said their 25k loc code base is 123kb (45kb gzipped)
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why anyone would want runtime type checking the way AtScript does it. With static typing, the compiler can catch type errors early, at the cost of rejecting some otherwise valid programs. With dynamic typing, that type checking is delayed until execution time. More programs are valid, but type errors are caught late. With AtScript-style late type checking, they took the dynamic type system and introduced…
You want both. Compile-time checking is necessary but not sufficient. Applications are not monoliths anymore, and web applications especially will interact with multiple other processes and services. For these you really need dynamic type checking. You can either try to do it in an ad hoc way in the application code, or building the check into the language.
are you talking about the typing of data received from outside sources?
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#139As if we didn't have enough reason to move on from Angular. Now you need to learn Typescript to contribute or grok the source files?
Angular 2 was being written in AtScript - in practice, not much has changed, just that Google and Microsoft are collaborating here and unifying efforts.
I think the important part here isn't that it is AtScript or TypeScript or ES6.
It's that they're collaborating.
I'm pretty sure that's a sign of the Apocalypse. We may want to stop worrying about transpiling and pay closer attention to the skies, looking for raining frogs and or blood moons.
Re: Angular 2: Built on TypeScript
#140I don't care what people say Angular totally suffers from the second system effect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect
I definitely concur. Having just attended emberconf, there's a stark contrast in how each framework is choosing to evolve with the web. Personally, I favor ember's approach of smaller, more iterative releases that are largely backwards compatible with previous versions. It not only means that teams building ember apps now can continue their efforts with confidence, but it's also a testament to the amount of thought a…
Thanks, Sam. Like all things in technology, there are tradeoffs to make and a cost-benefit analysis that every project will do differently. We spend a lot of time on backwards compatibility in Ember, but my goodness, it's painful.
Recently, the results of the Ember Community Survey were released and the aspect of it I'm most proud of is the number of developers who are using the latest release version[1]. The majority of respondents were on either 1.9 or 1.10, and 1.10 wasn't released until halfway through the survey.
1: http://www.201-created.com/ember-community-survey-2015#relea...