[xwiki-devs] Angular: good or bad in the end?
Some stuff to read to verify if there’s any truth in that, in the context of XWik project adoptiong Angular (or not): https://gist.github.com/tdd/5ba48ba5a2a179f2d0fa Thanks -Vincent
Hello. These articles are interesting and I would love to have Marius' opinion about it. But the most important point to me is that the Angular team is now re-writing their framework almost from scratch, and breaking retro-compatibility with the current version of the framework. That would be not such a problem if we would be able to directly use the new version, but it does not support old web browsers that do not auto-upgrade (e.g. IE 10!), so we are stuck on AngularJs 1.x. This is a serious issue since we love using technologies on the long term! Guillaume
Mostly bad. As Guillaume said, the fact that they have chosen to rewrite completely the framework (revolution vs. evolution) in version 2.0 means there's no point in using Angular 1.3 (a soon to be dead framework) on new stuff. And we cannot discuss about using Angular 2.0 until we see what it is about and how well it is received, which will take at least 1 year since it's first release. Moreover, the trend seems to be to move away from big monolithic JavaScript frameworks like Angular towards small libraries that perform specific tasks and are easier to replace or migrate. See http://www.breck-mckye.com/blog/2014/12/the-state-of-javascript-in-2015/ . You need data-binding, you look for a library that does just that. You need client-side templating, you look for a library that offers just that. etc. Thanks, Marius On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello.
These articles are interesting and I would love to have Marius' opinion about it.
But the most important point to me is that the Angular team is now re-writing their framework almost from scratch, and breaking retro-compatibility with the current version of the framework.
That would be not such a problem if we would be able to directly use the new version, but it does not support old web browsers that do not auto-upgrade (e.g. IE 10!), so we are stuck on AngularJs 1.x.
This is a serious issue since we love using technologies on the long term!
Guillaume _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
This was my main criticism of AngularJS from the beginning. Things which try to be everything usually end up quite efficiently falling on their faces, especially in the js world. On 06/09/2015 10:45 AM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote:
You need data-binding, you look for a library that does just that. You need client-side templating, you look for a library that offers just that. etc.
Now Angular 1.3 has a lot of support and won't be going away tomorrow or the next day so if it is really worth the costs we should use it even if we realize that it has no *long* term future, but are we adopting it because it makes our lives easier or are we drinking the coolaid, if it's #2 then we should not have been doing it in the first place and now that the coolaid has gone sour, we really should not be now. -- Satire is the escape hatch from the cycle of sorrow, hatred and violence. #JeSuisCharlie
On 9 Jun 2015 at 11:47:28, Caleb James DeLisle ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
This was my main criticism of AngularJS from the beginning. Things which try to be everything usually end up quite efficiently falling on their faces, especially in the js world.
I’ve not understood Angular as trying to be everything. For me it has always filled one main goal: automatic binding of data from model to the view. Now I’m not an expert of Angular :) Thanks -Vincent PS: I haven’t read the articles I pointed out yet!
On 06/09/2015 10:45 AM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote:
You need data-binding, you look for a library that does just that. You need client-side templating, you look for a library that offers just that. etc.
Now Angular 1.3 has a lot of support and won't be going away tomorrow or the next day so if it is really worth the costs we should use it even if we realize that it has no *long* term future, but are we adopting it because it makes our lives easier or are we drinking the coolaid, if it's #2 then we should not have been doing it in the first place and now that the coolaid has gone sour, we really should not be now.
-- Satire is the escape hatch from the cycle of sorrow, hatred and violence. #JeSuisCharlie
Thanks for sharing the link with critical articles regarding angular. Allthough the authors from the link (mostly) don't seem to have much experience with it. After using AngularJS the most part of the last 2 years in mixed Java/JS projects all I can say that I've come to like it. It has a really powerful abstraction in terms of data binding and as with every framework it has a learning curve to understand its limitations. Whats a big point IMO is the pretty good ecosystem of literature, an interactive home page illustrating most features by example, (could be even better though) and an active community on stackoverflow. There is especially good optional integration with bootstrap (although you wouldn't need it too much after some training) You can say its negative that they've sort of highjacked jQuery (jQLite) for DOM manipulation but this way they stay clear of dependencies. (If jQuery is loaded before angularjs it will be used instead of jQLite) On the negative side there is the uncertain future with compatibility-breaking version 2.0 on the horizon. Thats really sad as they really should'nt have named version 2 'angular'. I can imagine that version 1.x release cycle will be never ending. I don't know if history is repeating itself, I had been a big fan of the spring framework in its early versions and learned a lot from its codebase and discussions but now I feel they sort of ruin it (although without breaking compatibility at large). Besides all tech pros and cons it seems to be sort of a general dilemma: As a framework supplier if you just keep good stuff stable and only fix bugs then people won't trust you to be innovative enough and your software/framework will be losing relevance. So they try drilling deeper holes with the risk of ruining it ... Andreas Am 08.06.2015 um 12:39 schrieb [email protected]:
Some stuff to read to verify if there’s any truth in that, in the context of XWik project adoptiong Angular (or not): https://gist.github.com/tdd/5ba48ba5a2a179f2d0fa
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
FYI another article about why AngularJS might be bad: http://www.devbattles.com/en/sand/post-1640-Why+you+should+not+use+AngularJS Thanks -Vincent On 8 Jun 2015 at 12:39:43, [email protected] ([email protected]) wrote: Some stuff to read to verify if there’s any truth in that, in the context of XWik project adoptiong Angular (or not): https://gist.github.com/tdd/5ba48ba5a2a179f2d0fa Thanks -Vincent
participants (5)
-
Andreas Hahn -
Caleb James DeLisle -
Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
vincent＠massol.net