4 ms·

I think many of the arguments in this article might have been applicable back in 2012 when single page application frameworks were the new and popular thing. We

I think many of the arguments in this article might have been applicable back in 2012 when single page application frameworks were the new and popular thing. We can all agree that Angular 1 served us well at the time, but introduced added complexity and issues of its own (digest cycle being the main one). Some of the frameworks/libraries out there right now are stellar. I have been using Aurelia for 1.5 years now and honestly, I could never go back to jQuery and other libraries again. I've worked with React, Vue, Angular 2 and dipped my feet into Ember. Of all of those, I would say Angular 2 was by far the most non developer friendly framework of them all. Ember is the most opinionated and some developers like that, but for me, I have settled on Aurelia and I do not plan on switching anytime soon. Having said all of that, sometimes you don't need a SPA framework, sometimes jQuery or even Lodash will serve your needs. When it comes to needing support for routing, data-binding between view and some kind of view-model, I'll pick a SPA over jQuery and having to hack together something that is far less efficient than existing SPA solutions any day of the week. Assess your needs and choose whatever works for you.

gumoro 10y ago
Did you mean "non-developer friendly" or "non developer-friendly"?
- Noseshine 10y ago
  I think we can use context to easily infer what was meant: Looking at Angular, I don't see how a non-developer could even get started :-) I mean, what would a non-developer do when given this (and that's a very simple example)? https://github.com/AngularShowcase/angular2-sample-app https://github.com/AngularShowcase/angular2-sample-app I'm not making a quality statement, it's just that it is a complex framework for complex programming projects.
  - gumoro 10y ago
    Thanks, I have no experience with it and could not tell (although yeah I was leaning for your interpretation)... Maybe I'll reconsider this ng2 training then :)
  - indolering 10y ago
    There are legitimate disagreements to be had here but insulting the OP isn't one of them. When I switched from Polymer to Angular (1) I found a pile of incoherent design decisions which hobbled performance. It's better than writing everything from scratch, but that's not saying much. Maybe Angular 2 is much better, but I understand why it was a total rewrite.
    - Noseshine 10y ago
      > insulting the OP What on earth are you talking about???
      - indolering 10y ago
        I misspoke, I mean the "original author" not the OP.
        Noseshine 10y ago
        That doesn't make your reply to me > insulting the OP any more comprehensible!
        indolering 10y ago
        Oh Christ, I totally misread your post! I took "I don't see how a non-developer could even get started" as being in the first person. I'm sorry!
- exodust 10y ago
  Angular 2, non-developer friendly? Not happening.
  - SFJulie 10y ago
    Angular2 is «some kind of developer» friendly. The kind that loves framework but hate the underlying problem. It is like an heavy diving suits made for monkeys that loves to climb the height of frameworks complication. But there are some other kind of developers that feel naturally at ease with swimming in the water of the problem at hand, without requiring the framework. There is a class of expert coders that are in love with the tools, but really forgot that tools are a mean not an end. Imposing frameworks is for these monkey coders the way they can pay their enormous student debts. And they cannot live in a world where they have to adapt. On the other hand, there are coders who can and prefer to swim and are infuriated at the absurdity of being a fish trapped in a heavy diving suit.
    - tps5 10y ago
      Oh, OK.
    - exodust 10y ago
      I don't even, dive with a birthday suit but I'll swim with the fishes as soon as a monkey shows me the way.
      - SFJulie 10y ago
        ook Oook Oook .... ook?! -- The librarian
ilostmykeys 10y ago
No, we can't all agree that Angular 1 served us well. Terrible architecture IMO. Used it on one small project (just to be open minded) and never touched it again. React, on the other hand, is well founded, but has its own flaws, as does everything. Nothing is truly stellar.

gumoro 10y ago

Did you mean "non-developer friendly" or "non developer-friendly"?

Noseshine 10y ago
I think we can use context to easily infer what was meant: Looking at Angular, I don't see how a non-developer could even get started :-) I mean, what would a non-developer do when given this (and that's a very simple example)? https://github.com/AngularShowcase/angular2-sample-app https://github.com/AngularShowcase/angular2-sample-app I'm not making a quality statement, it's just that it is a complex framework for complex programming projects.
- gumoro 10y ago
  Thanks, I have no experience with it and could not tell (although yeah I was leaning for your interpretation)... Maybe I'll reconsider this ng2 training then :)
- indolering 10y ago
  There are legitimate disagreements to be had here but insulting the OP isn't one of them. When I switched from Polymer to Angular (1) I found a pile of incoherent design decisions which hobbled performance. It's better than writing everything from scratch, but that's not saying much. Maybe Angular 2 is much better, but I understand why it was a total rewrite.
  - Noseshine 10y ago
    > insulting the OP What on earth are you talking about???
    - indolering 10y ago
      I misspoke, I mean the "original author" not the OP.
      - Noseshine 10y ago
        That doesn't make your reply to me > insulting the OP any more comprehensible!
        indolering 10y ago
        Oh Christ, I totally misread your post! I took "I don't see how a non-developer could even get started" as being in the first person. I'm sorry!
exodust 10y ago
Angular 2, non-developer friendly? Not happening.
- SFJulie 10y ago
  Angular2 is «some kind of developer» friendly. The kind that loves framework but hate the underlying problem. It is like an heavy diving suits made for monkeys that loves to climb the height of frameworks complication. But there are some other kind of developers that feel naturally at ease with swimming in the water of the problem at hand, without requiring the framework. There is a class of expert coders that are in love with the tools, but really forgot that tools are a mean not an end. Imposing frameworks is for these monkey coders the way they can pay their enormous student debts. And they cannot live in a world where they have to adapt. On the other hand, there are coders who can and prefer to swim and are infuriated at the absurdity of being a fish trapped in a heavy diving suit.
  - tps5 10y ago
    Oh, OK.
  - exodust 10y ago
    I don't even, dive with a birthday suit but I'll swim with the fishes as soon as a monkey shows me the way.
    - SFJulie 10y ago
      ook Oook Oook .... ook?! -- The librarian

ilostmykeys 10y ago

No, we can't all agree that Angular 1 served us well. Terrible architecture IMO. Used it on one small project (just to be open minded) and never touched it again. React, on the other hand, is well founded, but has its own flaws, as does everything. Nothing is truly stellar.