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

Angular 9.0

blog.angular.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 308 posts

Re: Angular 9.0

#81

Post by kumarvvr »

ENGNR wrote: post #40
pacala wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Angular: Learn about property binding, event binding, pipes, templates, views, metadata, attribute directives, structural directives, services, modules, components, injectors. React: Write a function that generates a piece of HTML. Use standard event handlers to manage user interactions. Update state via setState methods. Ship it.

It reminds me of the whole .NET ecosystem. All of these custom magical special ways to do everything, compared to ‘dumb’ setups like node/ruby/go where the actual logic is just right there in front of you And every release .NET just keeps moving closer to the dumb systems. Simple and raw is good, keep the magic away

I am really glad there are other people who think this way. I am experienced with Python/JS/Ruby web app development models and recently had a look at ASP.NET Core web api projects.

The amount of complexity is mind boggling.

I mean, look at Flask in Python. Or even Expressjs in Node, why can't Microsoft come up with a simple framework that can run well on the .NET runtime?

I am a huge fan of C#, having used it for Desktop app development.

I would love to have a framework like flask in the .NET ecosystem.

Re: Angular 9.0

#82

Post by kumarvvr »

kabes wrote: post #77
qwerty456127 wrote: post #6

Why is Angular so less popular than React?

I've used both for non-trivial apps. I find angular heavily over-engineered. The problem is not just the learning curve, but the fact it becomes almost impossible to do anything the framework authors didn't envisage. React is just plain functions so you can do whatever you want, it never got in my way. Now, if angular would prove substantially better in terms of performance or maintainability or so, that might've bee…

I am curious. I have never used Angular or React seriously. But I have an upcoming project where I have to use an external HTML Canvas library.

Would you suggest I go with Angular or React?

It's a fairly complex project, involving user based label designs, data manipulation, etc.

I am API based server and a heavyweight front-end.

Re: Angular 9.0

#83

Post by hmcdona1 »

flukus wrote: post #38
qwerty456127 wrote: post #6

Why is Angular so less popular than React?

9 major versions in ~7 years indicates that it's not remotely stable enough to be taken seriously, particularly for corporate stuff that will likely never get an upgrade. Even the "LTS" releases are only supported for 18 months. React seems a bit better, but they don't seem to support older releases at all.

This couldn't be more wrong. The team does a great job handling upgrade paths post 2.0.

First off, Angular versions post 2.0 are nothing like AngularJS/1.x -> Angular/2.0. They are much more incremental and even the two times the entire renderer has been re-written it was an incredibly gradual process over multiple major versions with seemingly few changes to component and template APIs.

Second, upgrading between Angular versions couldn't be easier thanks to angular schematics. The process takes seconds and for specific rarer exceptions the team maintains this fantastic guide here: https://update.angular.io/

Re: Angular 9.0

#84

Post by dnautics »

_xnmw wrote: post #28
topspin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happened to React? It's on the wrong end of almost all of those micro benchmarks. I know micro benchmarks don't tell the whole story, but when you consistently wind up on the slow end it's not a good look.

React was a mistake of the last decade. React itself is a great academic idea (i.e. pure functions, composability), but the whole React-Redux boilerplate mess (I dare not call it an "ecosystem" because that word implies harmony of some sort) is the the result of an entire generation of code monkeys and job seekers who didn't design their technology stack with any real engineering consideration, but rather on the basi…

I can put a junior in react and be fairly sure that nothing too crazy will happen. I can't say the same for angular.

Re: Angular 9.0

#85

Post by filoeleven »

dfsegoat wrote: post #66

Is there still a clear path from angularjs 1.x onto angular 9.0? Anyone done it recently? Supporting a large 1.x codebase right now, and would love to start incrementally moving to angular.

AFAICT the upgrade path is still the same (0) and...it looked pretty painful when I first looked at moving from 1.x to 2.

I maintain a sizable 1.x codebase and am deciding what to move to, since 1.x is dead next year. I just don’t see a good reason to go to 2+. It’s a different framework. All of the UI libraries we built upon (ng-grid, angular-ui) are either gone or different enough that we will have to redo all of our code no matter what. If I have to switch frameworks anyway, I want to go with something simpler (no custom module nonsense, no annotations, no hierarchical dependency injectors, hell, no classes!) with a healthy ecosystem.

React with hooks, bootstrapped with CRA, is the clear winner for me. It’s just so much more straightforward to reason about, and way faster to build things with too. I made a toy app in Angular a year ago to check it out, and had a hell of a time even getting the simple data model working right. With React, day two had me already wiring up a dashboard with charted details that responded to a calendar widget I had customized to show QoS at a glance. I was looking at Vue too before I read up on react hooks, but once I saw functional components everywhere I was...erm...hooked. Sorry.

Now if only I can convince them to let me use ClojureScript...

(0) https://angular.io/guide/upgrade#using-a-module-loader

Re: Angular 9.0

#86

Post by Pmop »

_xnmw wrote: post #28
topspin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happened to React? It's on the wrong end of almost all of those micro benchmarks. I know micro benchmarks don't tell the whole story, but when you consistently wind up on the slow end it's not a good look.

React was a mistake of the last decade. React itself is a great academic idea (i.e. pure functions, composability), but the whole React-Redux boilerplate mess (I dare not call it an "ecosystem" because that word implies harmony of some sort) is the the result of an entire generation of code monkeys and job seekers who didn't design their technology stack with any real engineering consideration, but rather on the basi…

Oh man, don't say it. I've just started to learn React to improve my chances of landing into my first job, since all Java positions are either full-time or requires >4 years of previous relevant experience.

Re: Angular 9.0

#87

Post by technoplato »

_xnmw wrote: post #28
topspin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happened to React? It's on the wrong end of almost all of those micro benchmarks. I know micro benchmarks don't tell the whole story, but when you consistently wind up on the slow end it's not a good look.

React was a mistake of the last decade. React itself is a great academic idea (i.e. pure functions, composability), but the whole React-Redux boilerplate mess (I dare not call it an "ecosystem" because that word implies harmony of some sort) is the the result of an entire generation of code monkeys and job seekers who didn't design their technology stack with any real engineering consideration, but rather on the basi…

Your thoughts on Hooks?

Is it just the pairing of React / Redux you find unappealing?

Your feedback is disappointingly vague but you seem passionate about it so I assume there’s something deeper here.

Re: Angular 9.0

#88

Post by gitgud »

The only thing I like about Angular is the dependency injection of services. Having "services" managed for you and just picking and choosing what you want is pretty nice.

What I don't like is the verbosity and boilerplate... here's 2 examples:

- Routing boilerplate is convoluted and time consuming. I think Nuxt.js has a much nicer implementation of SPA routing, where the filesystem is used to map the routes.

- Angular modules are verbose, redundant and don't even truely encapsulate dependencies anyway. You can easily create implicit dependencies by relying on services instantiated in higher level modules.... which is bad

I love using Typescript though!

Re: Angular 9.0

#89

Post by myoon »

dfsegoat wrote: post #66

Is there still a clear path from angularjs 1.x onto angular 9.0? Anyone done it recently? Supporting a large 1.x codebase right now, and would love to start incrementally moving to angular.

The path provided is being able to load Angular 9 components into AngularJS components relatively seamlessly. This is helpful, but it's almost certainly a big leap to get your codebase compiling under angular-cli. If you manage it though, you can, in theory, do a bottom-up replacement of all your AngularJS components.

Another thing to think about though is how you're currently doing state management. Angular 9 is all about RxJS, and if you're currently managing state without it, your migration will be that much harder.

Re: Angular 9.0

#90

Post by flukus »

hmcdona1 wrote: post #83
flukus wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

9 major versions in ~7 years indicates that it's not remotely stable enough to be taken seriously, particularly for corporate stuff that will likely never get an upgrade. Even the "LTS" releases are only supported for 18 months. React seems a bit better, but they don't seem to support older releases at all.

This couldn't be more wrong. The team does a great job handling upgrade paths post 2.0. First off, Angular versions post 2.0 are nothing like AngularJS/1.x -> Angular/2.0. They are much more incremental and even the two times the entire renderer has been re-written it was an incredibly gradual process over multiple major versions with seemingly few changes to component and template APIs. Second, upgrading between Ang…

> This couldn't be more wrong. The team does a great job handling upgrade paths post 2.0.

The problem isn't how it's handled or how incremental it is, it's that there are so many upgrades with breaking changes, at least that's what they're communicating to me with their version numbers. There's also the lack of any real LTS versions I mentioned, 18 months doesn't cut it.

> They are much more incremental and even the two times the entire renderer has been re-written

Telling me that they've rewritten major components that frequently isn't exactly convincing me of the stability, its validates my previous belief that it isn't stable enough.

When they've got versions that are supported for 5+ years post release I'd consider it stable. It doesn't matter how good your upgrade guide is when you run into a bug or limitation with the current version and realize that you have to upgrade the entire framework and deal with all the breaking changes to get around it.

Compare that to react where you've got at least 3 years (assuming they follow semver) between breaking changes.

Post reply on HN