4 ms·

Angular Material is still missing a few essentials, but it is a good idea to speed up work on Material 2 now. Angular 2 will be out soon and many people will be

Angular Material is still missing a few essentials, but it is a good idea to speed up work on Material 2 now. Angular 2 will be out soon and many people will be unable to switch until Material 2 has caught up with the original.

Someone 10y ago
Doing that takes somewhat of a leap of faith. Why would one believe that, a year from now, we won't be in the situation of "Angular Material 2 is still missing a few essentials, but it is a good idea to speed up work on Material 3 now. Angular 3 will be out soon and many people will be unable to switch until Material 3 has caught up with the original." ? If one fears that, it may be better to switch to another library.
- lyschoening 10y ago
  I am also a bit afraid about the future of Angular, primarily because the Angular team is working on way too many projects that sometimes seem needlessly complex. I don't think anyone could pick this up for Google if they dropped the ball on Angular. A hypothetical Angular 3 worries me less. The bulk of the differences between Angular 1 and Angular 2 come down to making use of technical improvements to JavaScript itself. There will be further changes in the future, but nothing as radical as modules, classes and the different asynchronous-related features. I also hope it will become somewhat easier to switch from Angular 2 to a different framework or from Material 2 to a different UI framework, because the new JavaScript language features create obvious best practice solutions where frameworks previously had to come up with their own conventions.
  - Someone 10y ago
    "There will be further changes in the future, but nothing as radical as modules, classes and the different asynchronous-related features" I expect huge changes. I foresee a future where each webpage is an almost empty <html/> tag that does little more than defining a grid that loads a big blob of WebAssembly that builds the actual 'page' (if you can still call it that by that time). One advantage would be that, say, a Python or Rust framework can run Python/Rust in the browser. Another 'advantage' would be that large companies could keep their front-end code more secret (WebAssembly obfuscates better than minifying does)

Someone 10y ago

Doing that takes somewhat of a leap of faith. Why would one believe that, a year from now, we won't be in the situation of "Angular Material 2 is still missing a few essentials, but it is a good idea to speed up work on Material 3 now. Angular 3 will be out soon and many people will be unable to switch until Material 3 has caught up with the original." ? If one fears that, it may be better to switch to another library.

lyschoening 10y ago
I am also a bit afraid about the future of Angular, primarily because the Angular team is working on way too many projects that sometimes seem needlessly complex. I don't think anyone could pick this up for Google if they dropped the ball on Angular. A hypothetical Angular 3 worries me less. The bulk of the differences between Angular 1 and Angular 2 come down to making use of technical improvements to JavaScript itself. There will be further changes in the future, but nothing as radical as modules, classes and the different asynchronous-related features. I also hope it will become somewhat easier to switch from Angular 2 to a different framework or from Material 2 to a different UI framework, because the new JavaScript language features create obvious best practice solutions where frameworks previously had to come up with their own conventions.
- Someone 10y ago
  "There will be further changes in the future, but nothing as radical as modules, classes and the different asynchronous-related features" I expect huge changes. I foresee a future where each webpage is an almost empty <html/> tag that does little more than defining a grid that loads a big blob of WebAssembly that builds the actual 'page' (if you can still call it that by that time). One advantage would be that, say, a Python or Rust framework can run Python/Rust in the browser. Another 'advantage' would be that large companies could keep their front-end code more secret (WebAssembly obfuscates better than minifying does)