5 ms·

TL;DR: Author already knows Angular 1.x, doesn't have the time to learn anything new. "The stack you already know" is generally a good choice, yes. But the t

by Lazare 10y ago

TL;DR: Author already knows Angular 1.x, doesn't have the time to learn anything new. "The stack you already know" is generally a good choice, yes. But the title is misleading and somewhat clickbait; he's not "throwing out" React; he's keeping Angular. He doesn't list any technical advantages Angular 1.x has, and in fact he labels it "obsolete" and says using it in the long term is "suicidal". A better headline is "sometimes you gotta use the crap stack you have instead of learning a new one"; nothing he says has anything to do with specific frameworks.

jacquesm 10y ago
Yes, but that better headline does not have two buzzwords in it.
- sundvor 10y ago
  That headline would probably fare a lot better here, though.
frostirosti 10y ago
Sounds like the typical pretentious, the world is changing and I don't like it. Take the time to learn new technologies and adapt to changing landscapes. Mastering the abstract ideas makes you more flexible.
- frostirosti 10y ago
  I mean, I do also buy the, 'change is hard, and if Cost(Change) >= Cost(Not change) + delta(x months) then it's not worth it`
- discreteevent 10y ago
  I think the point of the article was that his goal is to develop his product before he runs out of money. Maybe if his business is a success he can then pursue your suggested goal of improving his abstract thinking and gaining flexibility.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- coldtea 10y ago
  >Sounds like the typical pretentious, the world is changing and I don't like it. Take the time to learn new technologies and adapt to changing landscapes. Why? Most of the times is fad. Learning some select things well is way better (and more feature proof) than "learning new technologies and adapting to changing landscapes" (e.g. VB in the nineties, Java/C# later, Rails after that, Node now). One could have been a stable salaried top-end engineer in the same, non-shifting, niche the whole time...
  - tracker1 10y ago
    JSX and Redux are going nowhere... they'll probably outlive React, though I also think that's going nowhere anytime soon. Redux (and similar single unidirectional stores) is a paradigm shift, but seeing ever broadening adoption and similar ngrx/store for example in the angular side. JSX as a compositional representation of a component tree is just plain useful... it's your component markup in your code, instead of code here, style there, markup over there... it's all on concern, the component. Many newer frameworks that differ from React on some technical reasons are using or suggest JSX transforms. You get that in a more stable platform with React. Add in fetch, react-icons and material-ui you're pretty close to set... start with create-react-app and your off and running, not much, if at all harder than getting angular1 up. And while Node is no longer growing exponentially, it's still one of the most prolific open communities around (including npm for client-side JS projects). As to your list.. Java and C# are pretty firmly around today.
    - nkkollaw 10y ago
      What about Polymer and web components? I think that's the future, not React.
      - tracker1 10y ago
        Web components, or something like it may well be the future... But to me the web component structure feels more alien than React.. it's almost the inverse though. Of course, that's once the browsers better support it, and ES6 modules natively is probably the biggest adjacent need, that will be some painful times during the transition.
hashmal 10y ago
The vast majority of article titles beginning with "why I..." (and variation) is clickbait. I still don't get why the HN community still falls for this every day.
cholantesh 10y ago
From this context, I guess one can surmise why his 'real' choices are between Angular, Ember, and ko (which, despite being knowledgeable and positive about Angular, I'd pick if I wanted to iterate fast), but still...not especially meaningful.
- Lazare 10y ago
  Yes, Knockout has a lot of drawbacks, but it's really good for rapid prototyping and iteration.
TheRealWatson 10y ago
I thought he gave his reasons for leaving React behind pretty clearly, no? Mostly around tools and work flow. These matter to him so I wouldn't just dismiss the article.
andrewclunn 10y ago
Angular 1: I'll just put all my dependencies in a libs folder so that I don't have to track the node modules folder in my repo. Angular 2 + tyepescript: Nope. All must be compiled on the fly from the node modules directory. So sayeth the Google. --- Angular 1: Oh look, stable production ready versions of all the external libraries I need. Angular 2: Coming soon... --- Hacker News Comments: Oh somebody prefers Angular 1 to Angular 2? Must be because they're stupid and hate learning new things.
itsdrewmiller 10y ago
That is not an honest tl;dr for this article. A better one would be: "Wants to move as fast as possible, spent too much time dealing with React tooling, picked Angular 1 from among what he sees as stable options [without a clear reason]". Or "Angular 1 - the php of javascript frameworks". :-) (Although obviously the php of javascript is jQuery, right?)
- hackerboos 10y ago
  If you want to get started quickly then review the fact that you even require a SPA in the first place. Other than that, you can get started pretty damn fast with create-react-app. https://github.com/facebookincubator/create-react-app https://github.com/facebookincubator/create-react-app
  - breeny592 10y ago
    Someone in the comments of the post suggested the same thing - people who criticise React (or any framework really) of "taking too long to set up" says one of two things to me: 1: they're too picky in what they want to use generators like this (or one of a billion Yeoman templates) - which then says don't complain something takes too long to set up when you're the one adding complexity 2: they count learning new methodologies/frameworks as part of the "setup" In the case of #2, what you know is always going to be quicker than what you don't. Complaining that "it takes too long" should be rephrased to mean "I don't have the time to learn something new"
  - tempVariable 10y ago
    Is there an equivalent for this scaffolding app, but for server side PHP or Ruby ?
    - headcanon 10y ago
      If you're saying "server-side PHP/Ruby API + React SPA frontend", you'll probably be able to find some boilerplates on a github search, but essentially they're just two separate apps at that point, so you're better off just building them that way and maybe tying them together with `make`. If you want server rendered React you can only really do that with Node.js. However the specific architectures/implementations of these apps vary enough its better to make one yourself that suits your needs. create-react-app is designed to have very minimal, bare-bones defaults so you can build whatever opinions you want on top of it.

by Lazare 10y ago

jacquesm 10y ago

Yes, but that better headline does not have two buzzwords in it.

sundvor 10y ago
That headline would probably fare a lot better here, though.

frostirosti 10y ago

Sounds like the typical pretentious, the world is changing and I don't like it. Take the time to learn new technologies and adapt to changing landscapes. Mastering the abstract ideas makes you more flexible.

frostirosti 10y ago
I mean, I do also buy the, 'change is hard, and if Cost(Change) >= Cost(Not change) + delta(x months) then it's not worth it`
discreteevent 10y ago
I think the point of the article was that his goal is to develop his product before he runs out of money. Maybe if his business is a success he can then pursue your suggested goal of improving his abstract thinking and gaining flexibility.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
coldtea 10y ago
>Sounds like the typical pretentious, the world is changing and I don't like it. Take the time to learn new technologies and adapt to changing landscapes. Why? Most of the times is fad. Learning some select things well is way better (and more feature proof) than "learning new technologies and adapting to changing landscapes" (e.g. VB in the nineties, Java/C# later, Rails after that, Node now). One could have been a stable salaried top-end engineer in the same, non-shifting, niche the whole time...
- tracker1 10y ago
  JSX and Redux are going nowhere... they'll probably outlive React, though I also think that's going nowhere anytime soon. Redux (and similar single unidirectional stores) is a paradigm shift, but seeing ever broadening adoption and similar ngrx/store for example in the angular side. JSX as a compositional representation of a component tree is just plain useful... it's your component markup in your code, instead of code here, style there, markup over there... it's all on concern, the component. Many newer frameworks that differ from React on some technical reasons are using or suggest JSX transforms. You get that in a more stable platform with React. Add in fetch, react-icons and material-ui you're pretty close to set... start with create-react-app and your off and running, not much, if at all harder than getting angular1 up. And while Node is no longer growing exponentially, it's still one of the most prolific open communities around (including npm for client-side JS projects). As to your list.. Java and C# are pretty firmly around today.
  - nkkollaw 10y ago
    What about Polymer and web components? I think that's the future, not React.
    - tracker1 10y ago
      Web components, or something like it may well be the future... But to me the web component structure feels more alien than React.. it's almost the inverse though. Of course, that's once the browsers better support it, and ES6 modules natively is probably the biggest adjacent need, that will be some painful times during the transition.

hashmal 10y ago

The vast majority of article titles beginning with "why I..." (and variation) is clickbait. I still don't get why the HN community still falls for this every day.

cholantesh 10y ago

From this context, I guess one can surmise why his 'real' choices are between Angular, Ember, and ko (which, despite being knowledgeable and positive about Angular, I'd pick if I wanted to iterate fast), but still...not especially meaningful.

Lazare 10y ago
Yes, Knockout has a lot of drawbacks, but it's really good for rapid prototyping and iteration.

TheRealWatson 10y ago

I thought he gave his reasons for leaving React behind pretty clearly, no? Mostly around tools and work flow. These matter to him so I wouldn't just dismiss the article.

andrewclunn 10y ago

Angular 1: I'll just put all my dependencies in a libs folder so that I don't have to track the node modules folder in my repo. Angular 2 + tyepescript: Nope. All must be compiled on the fly from the node modules directory. So sayeth the Google. --- Angular 1: Oh look, stable production ready versions of all the external libraries I need. Angular 2: Coming soon... --- Hacker News Comments: Oh somebody prefers Angular 1 to Angular 2? Must be because they're stupid and hate learning new things.

itsdrewmiller 10y ago

That is not an honest tl;dr for this article. A better one would be: "Wants to move as fast as possible, spent too much time dealing with React tooling, picked Angular 1 from among what he sees as stable options [without a clear reason]". Or "Angular 1 - the php of javascript frameworks". :-) (Although obviously the php of javascript is jQuery, right?)

hackerboos 10y ago
If you want to get started quickly then review the fact that you even require a SPA in the first place. Other than that, you can get started pretty damn fast with create-react-app. https://github.com/facebookincubator/create-react-app https://github.com/facebookincubator/create-react-app
- breeny592 10y ago
  Someone in the comments of the post suggested the same thing - people who criticise React (or any framework really) of "taking too long to set up" says one of two things to me: 1: they're too picky in what they want to use generators like this (or one of a billion Yeoman templates) - which then says don't complain something takes too long to set up when you're the one adding complexity 2: they count learning new methodologies/frameworks as part of the "setup" In the case of #2, what you know is always going to be quicker than what you don't. Complaining that "it takes too long" should be rephrased to mean "I don't have the time to learn something new"
- tempVariable 10y ago
  Is there an equivalent for this scaffolding app, but for server side PHP or Ruby ?
  - headcanon 10y ago
    If you're saying "server-side PHP/Ruby API + React SPA frontend", you'll probably be able to find some boilerplates on a github search, but essentially they're just two separate apps at that point, so you're better off just building them that way and maybe tying them together with `make`. If you want server rendered React you can only really do that with Node.js. However the specific architectures/implementations of these apps vary enough its better to make one yourself that suits your needs. create-react-app is designed to have very minimal, bare-bones defaults so you can build whatever opinions you want on top of it.