AngularJS
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
What does /g/ think about angular?
excellent framework 10/10
>>51840791
it's weird and i don't really like the whole "JS everything" hype
i prefer standard server-side MVC
I have no idea how it works, what it does, what to type, and what the performance implications of the functions are, but with enough trial and error of the braces, dependency injections and scopes it'll finally end up as a working website.
It's pretty bad.
React is better imo
I haven't done web development in a while. Back when I was doing it, it was code igniter plus jquery mostly on a lamp stack. With angular, are the cool kids just doing json APIs on the server side?
It's nice, but you really need to be educated on it. Read the articles and style guide written by John Papa.
Angular 2 kinda sucks though, liking react a lot more.
Who here angular 2? It seems much better and I really want to use it but theres still so much missing/broken.
>>51840962
Yeah pretty much. That's what we did at work. It's nice because now we can use the JSON service for anything, even if it's not an angular product.
>>51840938
>>51841010
React shills go away
>>51841067
React is objectively better though.
>>51841067
Dude the angular2 site has a warning saying "this product is not ready for production level applications". They're falling behind.
React definitely has its nuances but they're winning the race to be the next JS platform for single page apps.
>>51840791
I have used Angular on two projects, one still going. I have found it good for:
1. Complex or multi-step interactions within one page.
2. Smaller single-page applications.
3. Some widget that is present on every page, and needs a lot of logic, but does not control the page (i.e. but maybe some sidebar chat or the like).
But I would not use Angular for a fresh single-page application project right now. The biggest problem with Angular relates to all the little bumps along the way in development. They put a lot of time into smoothing out some bumps, and ignored others to the point that things that seem like bumps actually flat-out don't make sense, and will tilt you a bit. They set up their own world with their own terminology and metaphors. That is not inherently bad, but that sort of thing requires a lot of polish or it will feel frustrating. And so it does.
Frameworks like Ember or React have a fairly straightforward learning curve. Angular always felt a lot easier from the get-go.
Everything feels almost obvious, right until you try and do something Angular isn't okay with, or something that deviates slightly from the creator's intentions (e.g. a team of designers at a company that was then acquired by Google). As soon as you deviate, the learning curve goes vertical, and you SLAM into a wall of hours of documentation, videos, and wasted effort.
It's like "Oh cool, ng-repeat, ng-hide, ng-show, scope.$apply, and directives are pretty cool. I'm getting the hang of--" *SLAM* wait why is this variable "true" in the console and "false" when I view it in the DOM? Wait what's a "digest cycle"? Why can't I change the template for a directive dynamically?
I still use it, probably every-other week I have to do something working in Angular. It has a sweet spot, imo, in quickly adding medium-tier complex interactivity within one page. React still doesn't feel as quick for that use case yet, though it comes very close. I would not use it for a full SPA.
>>51841167
>Frameworks like Ember or React have a fairly straightforward learning curve. Angular always felt a lot easier from the get-go.
Sorry, I should have elaborated further on that sentence. What I mean is that Ember and React still feel like you have to learn things to get started, but Angular demos very well and you feel like you're up-and-running instantly without needing to learn a lot. Feels good at first.
>>51840872
>i prefer standard server-side MVC
So everything you've ever done requires filling out a form and submitting it. Right.
>>51841188
not him but you can still add dynamism to form submitting with simple ajax and a simple api
i wouldn't want to deal with helloworldproxies and helloworldfactories in fucking javascript
>>51840791
If you like it, check out angular material. Its super nice.
>>51841222
... and up with a messy pile of raw AJAX code and callbacks.
