4 ms·

>I think the tooling and approach it leverages fall in to a category that's prooven to scale with "enterprise grade" developers. I think react is proven to sca

by zxcvcxz 10y ago

>I think the tooling and approach it leverages fall in to a category that's prooven to scale with "enterprise grade" developers. I think react is proven to scale too and it's being used by a lot more large companies than Angular 2. Just a few months ago I tried to do the hello world tutorial on the angular 2 web site. I tried to do the javascript version and I couldn't get it to work. I then tried the type script version, still no luck. It wasn't until a while later when I tried again and they had updated the tutorial that I was even able to get hello world to run. I've programmed some large web apps in angular 1 and while I never fully understood the depths of angular 1 I was still able to leverage the parts of Angular I needed to build fully functional apps. Now coming from Angular 1 I feel like I'm in a somewhat new world. Then I tried react. It was simple, it didn't require me to completely re-learn everything I know about web dev. I wish I had tried react sooner. If it's good enough for facebook and the hundreds of other big websites that use it, then it's good enough for me.

rubber_duck 10y ago
I put "enterprise grade" in quotes on purpose. React stack (not React alone) being used successfully by a 9-5 Java or C# shop is not something I'd be willing to bet on. Sure it's simple as far as hello world apps go, but once you start adding state management, routing, etc. you start seeing that it diverges from conventional architecture approaches. Not saying that's necessarily bad but it does not mesh well with enterprise development - I hope you understand what I mean by this. And tools that help ensure consistency/quality in that kind of environment like TypeScript are very unsatisfying with React and various libraries, for eg. look how tedious Immutable.js typed records are, and check out typings for Redux related libs - bunch of any typed parameters and return values. Flux basically has no support outside of React and it wouldn't even run on Windows last time I checked. So like I said - it depends on the context - if we're talking a bunch of JS frontend devs I'd say go for React if it fits what you're trying to do. If you're a .NET/Java shop Angular 2 is probably going to be a better fit, patterns like DI, OOP, etc. are all at the core and it's a full stack framework you just pick up and follow it's conventions/best practices/design decisions - way less decisions than React and way better docs (for the stuff not included in React I mean, React documentation is decent).
- Roboprog 10y ago
  Enterprise? Beam me up, Scottie, there's no intelligent life here :-) I have a pretty good idea of the -- "just following orders", OOP-factory strongly typed except for all the XML and annotations, never heard of FP, idempotent, immutable, nor higher order functions, etc -- kind of developer that "Enterprise" probably implies. (I understand these people know ways to get some stuff done, and just want to go home, but holy cow it gives me a bad case of "COBOL fingers" and/or eye-strain working on those code bases -- spend some time to learn how to shorten things up, please)
  - rubber_duck 10y ago
    That's not fair :) But it's true a lot of people just don't give a shit and will spend more effort avoiding learning than it would take to learn something so you're forced to cater to lowest common denominator.
  - cc81 10y ago
    I agree but I will just note that knowing about FP, idempotent, immutable and higher order functions does not mean a developer is able to create maintainable applications in a reasonable time frame.
- cc81 10y ago
  I introduced React (alt as flux implementation) to a C# shop that develops internal tools within a large enterprise. We had one application before in Angular but people seem to like React much more and the uptake has been fast. DI in Angular 1 feels different than in C# land and is mostly used due to a missing module system. That exists these days and that makes it easier. Routing is the same. Most modern Angular guides even recommends you routing to directives and pretty much using them as react components to prepare for Angular 2. But the biggest thing about Angular is that you need to learn tons of things that are NOT familiar to a .NET developer. scope, transclusion, different types of bindings (represented by strings ...), template language etc. If they are not feeling familiar enough with the web to learn React then I don't think they can create a large angular application without creating a mess either.
stephenhuey 10y ago
I understand the feeling. I've had 13 years of experience with web apps and most of those were not SPAs, but I did get to build something with an early version of Angular 1. Recently I was looking at Angular 2 and React for a new project, but fortunately I stumbled upon Aurelia which feels far more natural to me based on all my web app experiences over the years. Having just the view portion of React was not enough for my needs and Aurelia isn't lacking anything I need for this project compared to Angular 2, plus I could eventually even use React with Aurelia if I ever felt the need. Aurelia plays nicely with lots of other tools.

by zxcvcxz 10y ago

rubber_duck 10y ago

I put "enterprise grade" in quotes on purpose. React stack (not React alone) being used successfully by a 9-5 Java or C# shop is not something I'd be willing to bet on. Sure it's simple as far as hello world apps go, but once you start adding state management, routing, etc. you start seeing that it diverges from conventional architecture approaches. Not saying that's necessarily bad but it does not mesh well with enterprise development - I hope you understand what I mean by this. And tools that help ensure consistency/quality in that kind of environment like TypeScript are very unsatisfying with React and various libraries, for eg. look how tedious Immutable.js typed records are, and check out typings for Redux related libs - bunch of any typed parameters and return values. Flux basically has no support outside of React and it wouldn't even run on Windows last time I checked. So like I said - it depends on the context - if we're talking a bunch of JS frontend devs I'd say go for React if it fits what you're trying to do. If you're a .NET/Java shop Angular 2 is probably going to be a better fit, patterns like DI, OOP, etc. are all at the core and it's a full stack framework you just pick up and follow it's conventions/best practices/design decisions - way less decisions than React and way better docs (for the stuff not included in React I mean, React documentation is decent).

Roboprog 10y ago
Enterprise? Beam me up, Scottie, there's no intelligent life here :-) I have a pretty good idea of the -- "just following orders", OOP-factory strongly typed except for all the XML and annotations, never heard of FP, idempotent, immutable, nor higher order functions, etc -- kind of developer that "Enterprise" probably implies. (I understand these people know ways to get some stuff done, and just want to go home, but holy cow it gives me a bad case of "COBOL fingers" and/or eye-strain working on those code bases -- spend some time to learn how to shorten things up, please)
- rubber_duck 10y ago
  That's not fair :) But it's true a lot of people just don't give a shit and will spend more effort avoiding learning than it would take to learn something so you're forced to cater to lowest common denominator.
- cc81 10y ago
  I agree but I will just note that knowing about FP, idempotent, immutable and higher order functions does not mean a developer is able to create maintainable applications in a reasonable time frame.
cc81 10y ago
I introduced React (alt as flux implementation) to a C# shop that develops internal tools within a large enterprise. We had one application before in Angular but people seem to like React much more and the uptake has been fast. DI in Angular 1 feels different than in C# land and is mostly used due to a missing module system. That exists these days and that makes it easier. Routing is the same. Most modern Angular guides even recommends you routing to directives and pretty much using them as react components to prepare for Angular 2. But the biggest thing about Angular is that you need to learn tons of things that are NOT familiar to a .NET developer. scope, transclusion, different types of bindings (represented by strings ...), template language etc. If they are not feeling familiar enough with the web to learn React then I don't think they can create a large angular application without creating a mess either.

stephenhuey 10y ago

I understand the feeling. I've had 13 years of experience with web apps and most of those were not SPAs, but I did get to build something with an early version of Angular 1. Recently I was looking at Angular 2 and React for a new project, but fortunately I stumbled upon Aurelia which feels far more natural to me based on all my web app experiences over the years. Having just the view portion of React was not enough for my needs and Aurelia isn't lacking anything I need for this project compared to Angular 2, plus I could eventually even use React with Aurelia if I ever felt the need. Aurelia plays nicely with lots of other tools.