5 ms·
Good point. I feel that my jQuery code is getting bloated, when I add more features to a page. Though, I am still a beginner when it comes too angularjs, but I
by 64bitbrain 10y ago
Good point. I feel that my jQuery code is getting bloated, when I add more features to a page. Though, I am still a beginner when it comes too angularjs, but I find using controller and services would clean up code by a huge margin.
- alistproducer2 10y agoIf your code base is still actively being enhanced or changed, then, yes, Angular is a better design than jQuery. jQuery locks you into the DOM structure, which makes changing the UI or adding features progressively more expensive as the app grows. Angular pretty much solves this problem by decoupling the UI from the code governing the functionality. Edit: I can't help but to shameless plug my AngularJS-like frame work, TemplarJS. It does most of the same things but I designed it to have a much flatter learning curve. I wouldn't recommend it for production as it is still a work-in-progress but take a look at it if you get the time. https://github.com/ShamariFeaster/Templar https://github.com/ShamariFeaster/Templar Examples: http://templar.bigfeastsoftware.com http://templar.bigfeastsoftware.com
- 64bitbrain 10y agoSure, I will definitely look into it. Thank you.
- _RPM 10y agoThis narrative is bullshit because it doesn't matter. At the end of the day, the client doesn't give a fuck if it's written as a CGI perl script, much less if it's between a javascript framework and a library.
- alistproducer2 10y agoIt does matter and your comment is crass and unhelpful.