4 ms·

I guess when you say "aging" team then I imagine your team members mostly spent their time in the OOP world, and Angular is definitely a better fit in this case

I guess when you say "aging" team then I imagine your team members mostly spent their time in the OOP world, and Angular is definitely a better fit in this case. React and Redux promotes a more functional style (even though React components are classes...), and a lot of OOP people I personally met were not so comfortable with it. Personally I love the functional concepts that it taught me, and I would never want to use a framework like Angular again. I'd rather make the leap and look into a real functional language for the frontend, like Elm, ClojureScript, PureScript,...

jamra 9y ago
I actually really liked Redux, but given the size of my team, I would choose Angular every time now. It's just more complete.
- unoti 9y ago
  You might like NGRX, then. It's basically Redux for Angular 2. http://onehungrymind.com/build-better-angular-2-application-redux-ngrx/ http://onehungrymind.com/build-better-angular-2-application-...
  - vhvhbbv 9y ago
    Will this ever end? How deep must the stack go? God, I give it 10 seconds for someone to pop out the woodwork and say "Why don't just use NGRX 'cute name'? Here's a link to GitHub"
  - hbggvv 9y ago
    Will this ever end? How deep must the stack go? God, I give it 10 seconds for someone to pop out of the woodwork and say "Why don't you just use NGRX v3 'cute name'? Here's a link to my 10 star GitHub"
jbreckmckye 9y ago
Honest question: why are React developers so fixated on functional programming? Why are objects - bundles of state and action that represent entities in the problem domain - automatically painted as an antipattern?
- pavlov 9y ago
  Because they're not old enough to remember what '80s GUI code looked like when the "Global god object + functions" pattern was last popular? That's a snarky reply, but there is a kernel of truth. OO was practically invented for GUIs (Smalltalk). Throwing it out entirely on principle just makes large programs harder to understand, IMHO.
  - simon83 9y ago
    True, I'm not old enough with my 33 years to remember that ;) But I do have quite a few years of experience in OOP and GUI programming (not just web stuff).
  - pikzen 9y ago
    >Because they're not old enough to remember what '80s GUI code looked like when the "Global god object + functions" pattern was last popular? Funnily enough, React + Redux is "Global god state + functions", with a bit of dispatch sprinkled in. Not too far away really. I definitely see the benefits of having a functional approach to defining UIs. My code is _somewhat_ clear, clearer than what it would have been with say, WinForms or something of the like. Going purely functional everywhere is just devs cargo culting.
- simon83 9y ago
  I had no real clue about functional programming prior to React. I always did OOP before. Once I got in touch with React, I got interested in FP. Then I read the "Mostly Adequate Guide to Functional Programming" [1] and it was kind of an revelation for me. I still do OOP, and I'm far, far away from being an FP expert, but I think if I'd take the effort to learn a real FP language then I probably wouldn't want to go back to OOP, and that's something I fear :) I've read a few blog posts from people who stated that learning FP kind of made them "unemployable", because they suddenly saw all the problems and annoyances that OOP brings with it (unfortunately I can't find the link anymore). This quote regarding OOP by Joe Armstrong, the creator of Erlang, is quite fitting: "You wanted a banana, but what you got was a gorilla holding the banana, and the entire jungle." [1]: https://drboolean.gitbooks.io/mostly-adequate-guide/ https://drboolean.gitbooks.io/mostly-adequate-guide/
eric_bullington 9y ago
> even though React components are classes... Since 0.14, React components can be functions, too: https://hackernoon.com/react-stateless-functional-components-nine-wins-you-might-have-overlooked-997b0d933dbc https://hackernoon.com/react-stateless-functional-components...

jamra 9y ago

I actually really liked Redux, but given the size of my team, I would choose Angular every time now. It's just more complete.

unoti 9y ago
You might like NGRX, then. It's basically Redux for Angular 2. http://onehungrymind.com/build-better-angular-2-application-redux-ngrx/ http://onehungrymind.com/build-better-angular-2-application-...
- vhvhbbv 9y ago
  Will this ever end? How deep must the stack go? God, I give it 10 seconds for someone to pop out the woodwork and say "Why don't just use NGRX 'cute name'? Here's a link to GitHub"
- hbggvv 9y ago
  Will this ever end? How deep must the stack go? God, I give it 10 seconds for someone to pop out of the woodwork and say "Why don't you just use NGRX v3 'cute name'? Here's a link to my 10 star GitHub"

jbreckmckye 9y ago

Honest question: why are React developers so fixated on functional programming? Why are objects - bundles of state and action that represent entities in the problem domain - automatically painted as an antipattern?

pavlov 9y ago
Because they're not old enough to remember what '80s GUI code looked like when the "Global god object + functions" pattern was last popular? That's a snarky reply, but there is a kernel of truth. OO was practically invented for GUIs (Smalltalk). Throwing it out entirely on principle just makes large programs harder to understand, IMHO.
- simon83 9y ago
  True, I'm not old enough with my 33 years to remember that ;) But I do have quite a few years of experience in OOP and GUI programming (not just web stuff).
- pikzen 9y ago
  >Because they're not old enough to remember what '80s GUI code looked like when the "Global god object + functions" pattern was last popular? Funnily enough, React + Redux is "Global god state + functions", with a bit of dispatch sprinkled in. Not too far away really. I definitely see the benefits of having a functional approach to defining UIs. My code is _somewhat_ clear, clearer than what it would have been with say, WinForms or something of the like. Going purely functional everywhere is just devs cargo culting.
simon83 9y ago
I had no real clue about functional programming prior to React. I always did OOP before. Once I got in touch with React, I got interested in FP. Then I read the "Mostly Adequate Guide to Functional Programming" [1] and it was kind of an revelation for me. I still do OOP, and I'm far, far away from being an FP expert, but I think if I'd take the effort to learn a real FP language then I probably wouldn't want to go back to OOP, and that's something I fear :) I've read a few blog posts from people who stated that learning FP kind of made them "unemployable", because they suddenly saw all the problems and annoyances that OOP brings with it (unfortunately I can't find the link anymore). This quote regarding OOP by Joe Armstrong, the creator of Erlang, is quite fitting: "You wanted a banana, but what you got was a gorilla holding the banana, and the entire jungle." [1]: https://drboolean.gitbooks.io/mostly-adequate-guide/ https://drboolean.gitbooks.io/mostly-adequate-guide/

eric_bullington 9y ago

> even though React components are classes... Since 0.14, React components can be functions, too: https://hackernoon.com/react-stateless-functional-components-nine-wins-you-might-have-overlooked-997b0d933dbc https://hackernoon.com/react-stateless-functional-components...