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

AngularJS 1.3.0

angularjs.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#61

Post by JanezStupar »

wiradikusuma wrote: post #57
JanezStupar wrote: post #51

I don't like Angular. Everybody likes it but I don't. It feels like 2004 all over again. SOAP! SOAP! XML! GWT! ColdFusion!!!!1onene!!!1 I also don't like working with Google toolchain, because for a company full of smartest dudes on the planet it certainly seems like these dudes don't care about their customers. Below is a list of reasons why I dislike Angular. 1. GAE documentation sucks, GoLang documentation sucks a…

Err.. 1. I admit Angular documentation sucks, but that's not atypical in any open source. It's getting way better btw, and there are tons of resources from 3rd party. 2. Which toolchain are you referring to? If we're talking Web/JavaScript (where Angular is for), I can say the toolchain e.g. Grunt is quite recent. 3. I somewhat agree with this. We can use e.g. Chrome Dev tools and Batarang (Angular Chrome plugin), bu…

2. Templates and existing JavaScript code - i.e. Bootstrap, jQuery, templating languages and other existing app components. With Backbone you can easily use any JavaScript library - because it itself is just JavaScript. I really don't like how angular forces everything to have a ng-something derivative.

5. Angular is not free because it is this monolyth that only the sage men within the temple of G can comprehend. The sages give you an incantation for a ritual and you, the believer use it. If it is not yet, then its core is going to become an indecipherable mess - built to serve the temple of G. Google is building it for itself and as usual doesn't really care about anything but its own objectives. Whatever they may be - a user might find itself in the same situation that i.e. Silverlight users found themselves after MS decided that Silverlight was not a good idea at all.

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#62

Post by flaie »

davej wrote: post #4

Shameless plug for my open-source project Angular Classy. Recently pre-released a beta for 1.0, of course it's fully tested and compatible AngularJS 1.3. http://davej.github.io/angular-classy/beta.html Feedback is always appreciated.

Looks cool, congrats !

I'll probably give it a try. I like the DRY part regarding the injected dependencies.

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#63

Post by wldlyinaccurate »

JanezStupar wrote: post #51

I don't like Angular. Everybody likes it but I don't. It feels like 2004 all over again. SOAP! SOAP! XML! GWT! ColdFusion!!!!1onene!!!1 I also don't like working with Google toolchain, because for a company full of smartest dudes on the planet it certainly seems like these dudes don't care about their customers. Below is a list of reasons why I dislike Angular. 1. GAE documentation sucks, GoLang documentation sucks a…

I may be biased, since I've been using (and enjoying) Angular for quite some time now. But I don't agree with any of your points.

1. I can't think of a single case where the Angular documentation has failed me. Yes, it's sketchy in places, but what open source documentation isn't?

2. I'm not sure which toolchain you're referring to, but Angular is just a framework - you can use whichever toolchain you like. You can even use no toolchain if you wish.

3. Debugging has improved significantly since 1.0, especially since Angular started adding HTML comments to denote where markup is generated from. Browser extensions like AngularJS Batarang and ng-inspector help out as well.

4. Again, I don't know exactly what you're referring to here, but I feel like Angular's concepts and semantics fit in just fine with other systems. Scopes, services, controllers, modules... These all mean what you think they mean.

5. I'm genuinely interested how you think using an open-source JS framework will tie you to a corporation? Hell, I'm interested how using Java will tie you to (I assume) Oracle when things like OpenJDK exist?

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#64

Post by andybak »

JDDunn9 wrote: post #44
rmsaksida wrote: post #31

I feel Angular is better than almost everything out there but still not quite right. It seems way too complex for what it does, and the syntax looks like somebody vomited all over your code. Does two-way databinding have to be so awkward? Angular does help you in writing maintainable code (which is vital for JavaScript - dealing with large JS codebases is hard), but it also ties you to a technology which is probably…

> Does two-way databinding have to be so awkward? The verbose parts have nothing to do with the data-binding. The dependency injection is there for testability ( https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/unit-testing ), you have to use array notation because JS changes variable names upon minification. The rest is just objects being used to set up options.

JS doesn't change variable names upon minification - minifiers do. For the dubious benefit of saving probably less than 5-10% of a transfer we've decided it's worth repeating ourselves pointlessly.

Fix the minifiers.

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#65

Post by ahoge »

andybak wrote: post #64
JDDunn9 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does two-way databinding have to be so awkward? The verbose parts have nothing to do with the data-binding. The dependency injection is there for testability ( https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/unit-testing ), you have to use array notation because JS changes variable names upon minification. The rest is just objects being used to set up options.

JS doesn't change variable names upon minification - minifiers do. For the dubious benefit of saving probably less than 5-10% of a transfer we've decided it's worth repeating ourselves pointlessly. Fix the minifiers.

> Fix the minifiers.

Most minifiers have a switch for that. E.g. UglifyJS2's is "-m"/"--mangle". YUI Compressor's is "--nomunge".

By the way, this stuff looks a lot nicer with AngularDart or Angular 2.x.

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#66

Post by mercer »

Kiro wrote: post #42
Renaud wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But React + Flux is an alternative to MVC. Still early days for Flux, but the principles are sound and I hope it offers a viable alternative to all these framework that rely mainly on variants of the MVC pattern.

Flux seem so overcomplicated I can't believe what I'm seeing.

Perhaps Reflux is better for your purposes?

https://github.com/spoike/refluxjs

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#67

Post by ahoge »

pixie_ wrote: post #8
heydenberk wrote: post #6

> One-time bindings – by prefixing an expression with "::", it will only be interpolated once, and then no longer watched. Does anyone else find the DSL(s) in Angular to be maddening?

If Angular wasn't endorsed by Google would it be as popular as it is?

It got attention before it was associated with Google. It was created by a googler, but it wasn't a Google project from the beginning.

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#68

Post by mrcarrot »

omouse wrote: post #24
heydenberk wrote: post #6

> One-time bindings – by prefixing an expression with "::", it will only be interpolated once, and then no longer watched. Does anyone else find the DSL(s) in Angular to be maddening?

The biggest mistake they've made with Angular is that they're using a custom documentation system that's also written in Angular and JavaScript. The DSLs would be okay to work with if they were better documented and had better examples and an easy to use docs system.

They did at least used to have a discussion/comments section on each documentation page, which I often found at least as useful as the actual docs.

And then they removed them, because, umm, maybe they were too useful, who knows! :(

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#69

Post by lukasm »

rmsaksida wrote: post #31

I feel Angular is better than almost everything out there but still not quite right. It seems way too complex for what it does, and the syntax looks like somebody vomited all over your code. Does two-way databinding have to be so awkward? Angular does help you in writing maintainable code (which is vital for JavaScript - dealing with large JS codebases is hard), but it also ties you to a technology which is probably…

I had the same feeling, but after 6 months is seems more natural than jQuery. It's kind of like git. You have to change your mindset coming from SVN.

Re: AngularJS 1.3.0

#70

Post by holic »

rmsaksida wrote: post #31

I feel Angular is better than almost everything out there but still not quite right. It seems way too complex for what it does, and the syntax looks like somebody vomited all over your code. Does two-way databinding have to be so awkward? Angular does help you in writing maintainable code (which is vital for JavaScript - dealing with large JS codebases is hard), but it also ties you to a technology which is probably…

I felt the same, and then I found Vue: http://vuejs.org/
Post reply on HN