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

Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

angularjs.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 360 posts

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#301

Post by robwormald »

Touche wrote: post #177
robwormald wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can already use most simple web components in Angular without issues - as far as Angular is concerned, it's just another DOM element. We also support native (or emulated) Shadow DOM out of the box. It gets a little more interesting when you start interleaving Angular and WebComponents, but one of the deprecations in 4.0 (regarding Angular's use of the tag) is squarely aimed at making that easier in the future.

Thanks, what I was asking is when are Angular components going to be Web components?

It's unlikely we'll ever have developers write Custom Elements directly - that said, the View Engine rewrite we just did gives us the ability to (theoretically) have our compiler output Custom Elements. We're investigating some use cases on this.

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#304

Post by andrei_says_ »

ssijak wrote: post #183

Hmm. I see that Angular is getting aaaaalot of hate here. I really tried to understand why but have not found really valid reasons, just preferences. I have used Angular 1.x a lot and have just tried Angular 2. It really enables me (somebody who comes from primarily strong backend dev experience) to work on frontend SPA apps productively and fast. It does not 'feel' heavyweight or that it gets in my way too much, but…

Please take a look at Vue.js. I'm being redundant, intentionally.

There's something about it -- feels clean and minimal, works really well with my ruby- and rails- influenced mind, organizes my thinking about an app and makes it easy to have things in their right places, at a correct level of abstraction, effortlessly.

My reaction after encountering vuejs was one of relief -- finally seeing an option I resonate with, a vision driven by someone whose thinking is aligned with my desire to avoid confusion, complexity and frustration.

The free screencasts at laracasts and egghead.io are quick and fantastic.

https://laracasts.com/series/learn-vue-2-step-by-step

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#305

Post by dpacmittal »

camus2 wrote: post #63
otto_ortega wrote: post #57

VueJS is the only of these JavaScript UI Libraries/Frameworks I can stand... The only one whose syntax doesn't make my eyes bleed!... I can't wait for Alibaba's Weex to be officially released so Vue can be used for developing mobile apps too. Reusing components across platforms and the web is the only reason why I would like to jump into the JS wagon!

> VueJS is the only of these JavaScript UI Libraries/Frameworks I can stand... Agreed. I just can't stand Angular's bloat, especially its IoC container. If I want to use one, then let me choose the one I want. A UI framework shouldn't come with it's own container it makes no sense. If this UI framework is too complicated to boostrap manually then it's too complicated at first place. To make things clear I actually li…

>A UI framework shouldn't come with it's own container it makes no sense. If this UI framework is too complicated to boostrap manually then it's too complicated at first place.

I don't think Angular is just a UI framework though.

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#306

Post by kapv89 »

tomelders wrote: post #297
kevindqc wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When combined with things like Immutable, Sagas, and ReSelect, the Redux/React style of architecture (feel free to swap out Redux or React for whatever you prefer) is so much more practical and useful compared to Angular. You can use all that with angular 2. I am. Redux -> @ngrx/store Immutable -> same Sagas -> @ngrx/effects ReSelect -> same Example here: https://github.com/ngrx/example-app

But why? If you're adding all of that to make Angular work the way you want it, what benefits are you actually getting from Angular?

Same question can be asked for react. FYI you can easily build decent sized apps in react without redux

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#307

Post by gmiller123456 »

danielpatrick wrote: post #192
nkkollaw wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question. Who thought it was a good idea to make Angular 2 incompatible with Angular 1? You had it, and you blew it. Most people aren't going to use any version of Angular, now, and have switched to React and Vue.

Angular 2 is a different framework, plain and simple. You can continue to use AngularJS 1.x if you were on that framework. I understand the frustration of someone who has used AngularJS 1.x. There is not really a straightforward and low risk path to upgrading a production app. But that is like saying there is not really a straightforward risk to switching from AngularJS 1.x to React. They're different frameworks. Ang…

> Angular 2 is a different framework, plain and simple.

Yes. Retaining the Angular name is just a way to slightly disguise that they've dropped a framework altogether and left its user high and dry.

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#309

Post by moloch »

Nitramp wrote: post #188
moloch wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol, if only the real world were that simple. I have an Angular 2.4 project that when updated to 4.0.0 produces about 300+ build time errors (guess you can't access `private` members from templates anymore, it'll be fuuuuuun updating every component and template to work with "backwards" compatible v4), but basically every other version of Angular breaks your code so you just sorta have to live with it.

That didn't change between Angular 2 and Angular 4 - but maybe you changed your build process and are now running AoT with error checking? That would explain why your templates are now error checked and were not before.

Is that enabled by default in 4? I use and identical AOT build process with 2.4 and 4 (ng-cli) and there's no problems building with 2.4

Re: Angular 4.0.0 Now Available

#310

Post by dsiegel2275 »

throwaywgsid wrote: post #108
tomelders wrote: post #59

I'll be that guy. I'm sure the Angular team are great people, and they're clearly talented devs... but stay away from Angular. It doesn't help with the problems you will actually face. Typed Javascript is a cargo cult. Angular just plain confusing for no apparent benefit. Dependency injection is bizarre. The distinction between modules, components, and directive is unnecessary. The Javascript community in general is…

Angular is a mess but typescript is alive and kicking on its own, even with react. Personally I'm one of the apparently rare breeds that hate angular but loves typescript. I wish there were more of us. They're really in different realms and please don't make them part of the same whole. Typescript is a transpiler but the transforms it does are designed to mimic accepted JavaScript idioms. When I'm debugging typescrip…

I agree also.

I've been using TypeScript with React now for about six months - prior to that I was working on a large React/Redux app written in ES6 using Babel.

In my experience, I have seen a significant increase in my productivity after embracing TypeScript. With the static type support I am fixing/avoiding more errors at 'authoring' time due to intellisense and the VSCode editor flagging what will be compile errors. I am able to refactor across files with a lot less fear.

The advanced types in TS (specifically discriminated unions) make Redux actions and reducer code a lot more maintainable.

Overall I'm very pleased with the transition to TS. I spent time learning Elm last year and simply fell in love with that development experience. For reasons out of my control I cannot use it in production but with my current TS+React approach I can at least get close to what Elm offers.

Post reply on HN