6 ms·

Angular 4.3 Now Available

37 points by janober 9y ago

nkkollaw 9y ago
People are still using Angular, after version 2 was unexplicably incompatible with v.1..?
- ketralnis 9y ago
  I don't understand the mentality behind "people are still using _____?" comments. What are you trying to communicate here?
  - nkkollaw 9y ago
    I was just genuinely wondering if many people still use Angular, since I don't see it mentioned it that much anymore.
- jorgemf 9y ago
  Where you say Angular, you can replace it by Python, Swift, ...
- savanaly 9y ago
  Angular 2 was seriously considered by my company. Having it named "2" was an unfortunate marketing error as in reality it is a new framework inspired by the old one. That shouldn't reflect poorly on the framework though.
  - digitalzombie 9y ago
    It does reflect poorly on how they just drop the old one and said we're making something else now. This is one of the reasons why I just gave up on web dev. It's to chaotic and messy. I've basically left this industry and let it sort itself out. I thought maybe after 2-3 years it'll be good again. Recently did some neat data viz front end and wow it didn't get better at all. What the hell happen to harmony? There are shims and shams for es5 and es6... It's even more fragmented.
    - kgreene2 9y ago
      Did they really "just drop the old one"? Angular 2 was announced over 2 years ago, and initially was released 10 months ago. Meanwhile, Angular 1 has continued to receive support this entire time, with the latest release 11 days ago and the latest merge to master being 4 days ago. And, if you're on Angular 1 and want to upgrade, they've published an official migration guide.
      - veidr 9y ago
        No, they didn't. In fact, they just recently released 1.6.5, yet another in a stream of maintenance updates to the old-generation 1.x branch. Technical rants are one of the reasons I enjoy reading this website, and lot of people here like to shit on Angular. But it seems to me the reasons aren't usually technical, they are more techno-political or ford-vs-chevy type arguments. The term "over-engineered" is often thrown out there, and while that's a hard-to-quantify subjective judgement, it does kind of fit. There are many features in Angular, which do lots of things for you, but at the cost of added complexity and a steeper learning curve. But one of the good aspects of being "over-engineered" is the incredibly long sunset window for Angular 1.x (the previous, and largely incompatible generation; 2.x onwards is "current generation"). Maintenance releases to 1.x keep coming out, some of which (1.5) add a bunch of new stuff that makes it easier to modernize your design even under the old framework, and to port your legacy 1.x code to modern Angular when the time comes. Also, there's an well-documented upgrade path, and (importantly!) an officially supported library (ngUpgrade) that lets you make a gradual transition to modern angular, where your old code runs in Angular 1.x, new components run in modern Angular, ngUpgrade helps integrate the two worlds in a single app in the browser. So you can do a component-by-component migration of a production app over years. As a native app developer (and not a fan of JavaScript) who nevertheless last year joined a team that also has to maintain an old, in-production, customer-facing Angular 1.x app, I really like all these "over-engineered" features. That's not to say I love every single thing about Angular but I think a.) it's pretty good, b.) modern version is better than the old one and going in the right direction, and c.) lots of the complaints are more like "they fucked up the upgrade process from 1.x" (they did) or "Google sux brah" (whatever).
- danielharrison 9y ago
  No. Nobody uses it after the un-backwards-conpatibility scandal of '14. People are in limbo searching for the next angular but, alas, it cannot be found. Do you have any suggestions, your holiness?
  - nkkollaw 9y ago
    Well, I'm just saying that if they've done it once—and when their framework was at its peak—they might do it again.
tanilama 9y ago
Where is Angular 3?
- jamespacileo 9y ago
  Where is Windows 9?
- hanspragt 9y ago
  They had a router package in angular 2 which had 3 as it major version number. To sync all version numbers, they decided the next version would be 4. http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2016/12/ok-let-me-explain-its-going-to-be.html http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2016/12/ok-let-me-explain-its-...
sheeshkebab 9y ago
Anyone using this? (Or I guess any angular > 1.x)
- Syntaf 9y ago
  Angular4 is pretty awesome and I definitely vouch for it over 1.X. I Find 1.x pretty ugly and un-fun to write but 2/4 is pretty clean.
kirinan 9y ago
I know Angular is an easy framework to crap on for frontend developers, but I love Angular. Im a Python/Java developer and much prefer all inclusive frameworks like Django/Flask/Dropwizard over the micro frameworks like Flask/Spring that have great ecosystems but need to be pieced together. I realize I never use "Best in Breed" libraries and am usually forced to use whatever is built in but I don't mind because I get shit done. I really love the fact that I install Angular and BOOM I have everything I need to build an amazing application. Even better, with Angular CLI I can quickly bootstrap a frontend. If I use NGPrime, which is an open source component library, I can even quicker build an MVP. That combined with Django feels like super powers for building applications.
- skrowl 9y ago
  I'm in the same boat. I get that it's "cool" to crap on Angular here on HN, but I find it to be a great framework that you only need to learn by itself (unlike React where you also need 10 other things). Angular CLI makes it easy to get started and examples / help are easy to find.
  - danielharrison 9y ago
    To be fair, those '10 other things' are already baked into angular, so if you don't want them, well, too bad.
    - atmartins 9y ago
      But you don't have to import something if you don't intend on using it. They're baked in conceptually, so there's more coherence, but the deployment payload doesn't have to be unnecessarily large.
      - danielharrison 9y ago
        I stand corrected. Looks as if things have changed from what I remember.
- 9y ago
Syntaf 9y ago
I'm pretty bummed they removed /deep/ , which was a pretty damn useful feature for overriding library css. Guess I won't be upgrading to 4.3 now Just another step in ensuring Angular will be the most overengineered frontend framework on the web sigh.
- buu700 9y ago
  It hasn't been removed (as far as the changelog says), just deprecated, and with good reason. From the relevant commit message: - /deep/ is deprecated [as a web standard] and being removed from Chrome - >>> is semantically invalid in a stylesheet - sass will no longer support either in any version of sass That said, it seems that the immediate replacement (::ng-deep) is also deprecated? I get that the decision is mostly out of Angular's hands, but that sucks.
miiiiiike 9y ago
I like Angular 4 but I’ve been having a hard time finding people to take over an ng2 project. My guess is that in a year people will come around. mike(at)edition(dot)io if anyone is looking in the meantime.
tannhaeuser 9y ago
Generational churn in the web front end framework space is a phenomenon deserving special examination. Just 2-4 years ago, Angular skills were in high demand, only to be completely replaced by React & Co. I'm not complaining, much preferring React's model over Angular's decorator and type heavy one which is too Java/JEE-ish for my taste. But what makes frontenders so confident they've found the holy grail at the height of a hype cycle every single time? Is it a sales story to better market one's skills? Is it a consequence of a young developer's mind trying to ascertain himself/herself and become part of a group of like-minded people? Because rationality seems not always a given when it comes to web dev. I've seen React projects which, frankly, were trivial to make using just basic Javascript and DOM techniques, plus maybe some jquery. But the developers absolutely wanted to pad their resumes with React above everything else.
- sjellis 9y ago
  I think that it's always worth remembering the iceberg effect when we talk about trends: the silent majority of developers don't comment on HN or Reddit, don't answer questions on Stack Overflow, don't publish code on GitHub, and are using the same un-hip stacks year-on-year (Java, C#, PHP, maybe Rails, jQuery or Angular). The C# developers that I have spoken to have used Angular for years, like TypeScript, and reach for Angular + TS by default, rather than React + ES6/7. Plenty of Rails developers stick with jQuery, maybe with some CoffeeScript: Rails only "modernized" their JS stack a few months ago.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - timrichard 9y ago
    The last StackOverflow survey showed a much greater dev mindshare for Angular than React, so I'm not sure where the grandparent gets "completely replaced by React & Co"... unless going by HN/Reddit memes/buzz.
- aikah 9y ago
  There is no holy-grail. One cannot mask his ignorance of the DOM and web API with a front-end framework. Just like one cannot mask his ignorance of HTTP and REST with SPRING,ASP.NET,Django or Rails. you might know how to upload a file with Django API but if you can't do that with a barebone HTTP server then you'll be just another mediocre developer who only knows framework X or Y. Angular and co, it's just like Spring and Co, it's bureaucracy. Some people like bureaucracy, because it make them look busy.
paradite 9y ago
I don't understand why Google has to depreciate something so low level as http client in their frameworks. I've already had enough mess with Android, now the trend comes to Angular. Even after a complete re-write of AngularJS, they still have to do this. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32153318/httpclient-wont-import-in-android-studio https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32153318/httpclient-wont...

37 points by janober 9y ago

nkkollaw 9y ago

People are still using Angular, after version 2 was unexplicably incompatible with v.1..?

ketralnis 9y ago
I don't understand the mentality behind "people are still using _____?" comments. What are you trying to communicate here?
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  I was just genuinely wondering if many people still use Angular, since I don't see it mentioned it that much anymore.
jorgemf 9y ago
Where you say Angular, you can replace it by Python, Swift, ...
savanaly 9y ago
Angular 2 was seriously considered by my company. Having it named "2" was an unfortunate marketing error as in reality it is a new framework inspired by the old one. That shouldn't reflect poorly on the framework though.
- digitalzombie 9y ago
  It does reflect poorly on how they just drop the old one and said we're making something else now. This is one of the reasons why I just gave up on web dev. It's to chaotic and messy. I've basically left this industry and let it sort itself out. I thought maybe after 2-3 years it'll be good again. Recently did some neat data viz front end and wow it didn't get better at all. What the hell happen to harmony? There are shims and shams for es5 and es6... It's even more fragmented.
  - kgreene2 9y ago
    Did they really "just drop the old one"? Angular 2 was announced over 2 years ago, and initially was released 10 months ago. Meanwhile, Angular 1 has continued to receive support this entire time, with the latest release 11 days ago and the latest merge to master being 4 days ago. And, if you're on Angular 1 and want to upgrade, they've published an official migration guide.
    - veidr 9y ago
      No, they didn't. In fact, they just recently released 1.6.5, yet another in a stream of maintenance updates to the old-generation 1.x branch. Technical rants are one of the reasons I enjoy reading this website, and lot of people here like to shit on Angular. But it seems to me the reasons aren't usually technical, they are more techno-political or ford-vs-chevy type arguments. The term "over-engineered" is often thrown out there, and while that's a hard-to-quantify subjective judgement, it does kind of fit. There are many features in Angular, which do lots of things for you, but at the cost of added complexity and a steeper learning curve. But one of the good aspects of being "over-engineered" is the incredibly long sunset window for Angular 1.x (the previous, and largely incompatible generation; 2.x onwards is "current generation"). Maintenance releases to 1.x keep coming out, some of which (1.5) add a bunch of new stuff that makes it easier to modernize your design even under the old framework, and to port your legacy 1.x code to modern Angular when the time comes. Also, there's an well-documented upgrade path, and (importantly!) an officially supported library (ngUpgrade) that lets you make a gradual transition to modern angular, where your old code runs in Angular 1.x, new components run in modern Angular, ngUpgrade helps integrate the two worlds in a single app in the browser. So you can do a component-by-component migration of a production app over years. As a native app developer (and not a fan of JavaScript) who nevertheless last year joined a team that also has to maintain an old, in-production, customer-facing Angular 1.x app, I really like all these "over-engineered" features. That's not to say I love every single thing about Angular but I think a.) it's pretty good, b.) modern version is better than the old one and going in the right direction, and c.) lots of the complaints are more like "they fucked up the upgrade process from 1.x" (they did) or "Google sux brah" (whatever).
danielharrison 9y ago
No. Nobody uses it after the un-backwards-conpatibility scandal of '14. People are in limbo searching for the next angular but, alas, it cannot be found. Do you have any suggestions, your holiness?
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  Well, I'm just saying that if they've done it once—and when their framework was at its peak—they might do it again.

tanilama 9y ago

Where is Angular 3?

jamespacileo 9y ago
Where is Windows 9?
hanspragt 9y ago
They had a router package in angular 2 which had 3 as it major version number. To sync all version numbers, they decided the next version would be 4. http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2016/12/ok-let-me-explain-its-going-to-be.html http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2016/12/ok-let-me-explain-its-...

sheeshkebab 9y ago

Anyone using this? (Or I guess any angular > 1.x)

Syntaf 9y ago
Angular4 is pretty awesome and I definitely vouch for it over 1.X. I Find 1.x pretty ugly and un-fun to write but 2/4 is pretty clean.

kirinan 9y ago

I know Angular is an easy framework to crap on for frontend developers, but I love Angular. Im a Python/Java developer and much prefer all inclusive frameworks like Django/Flask/Dropwizard over the micro frameworks like Flask/Spring that have great ecosystems but need to be pieced together. I realize I never use "Best in Breed" libraries and am usually forced to use whatever is built in but I don't mind because I get shit done. I really love the fact that I install Angular and BOOM I have everything I need to build an amazing application. Even better, with Angular CLI I can quickly bootstrap a frontend. If I use NGPrime, which is an open source component library, I can even quicker build an MVP. That combined with Django feels like super powers for building applications.

skrowl 9y ago
I'm in the same boat. I get that it's "cool" to crap on Angular here on HN, but I find it to be a great framework that you only need to learn by itself (unlike React where you also need 10 other things). Angular CLI makes it easy to get started and examples / help are easy to find.
- danielharrison 9y ago
  To be fair, those '10 other things' are already baked into angular, so if you don't want them, well, too bad.
  - atmartins 9y ago
    But you don't have to import something if you don't intend on using it. They're baked in conceptually, so there's more coherence, but the deployment payload doesn't have to be unnecessarily large.
    - danielharrison 9y ago
      I stand corrected. Looks as if things have changed from what I remember.
9y ago

Syntaf 9y ago

I'm pretty bummed they removed /deep/ , which was a pretty damn useful feature for overriding library css. Guess I won't be upgrading to 4.3 now Just another step in ensuring Angular will be the most overengineered frontend framework on the web sigh.

buu700 9y ago
It hasn't been removed (as far as the changelog says), just deprecated, and with good reason. From the relevant commit message: - /deep/ is deprecated [as a web standard] and being removed from Chrome - >>> is semantically invalid in a stylesheet - sass will no longer support either in any version of sass That said, it seems that the immediate replacement (::ng-deep) is also deprecated? I get that the decision is mostly out of Angular's hands, but that sucks.

miiiiiike 9y ago

I like Angular 4 but I’ve been having a hard time finding people to take over an ng2 project. My guess is that in a year people will come around. mike(at)edition(dot)io if anyone is looking in the meantime.

tannhaeuser 9y ago

Generational churn in the web front end framework space is a phenomenon deserving special examination. Just 2-4 years ago, Angular skills were in high demand, only to be completely replaced by React & Co. I'm not complaining, much preferring React's model over Angular's decorator and type heavy one which is too Java/JEE-ish for my taste. But what makes frontenders so confident they've found the holy grail at the height of a hype cycle every single time? Is it a sales story to better market one's skills? Is it a consequence of a young developer's mind trying to ascertain himself/herself and become part of a group of like-minded people? Because rationality seems not always a given when it comes to web dev. I've seen React projects which, frankly, were trivial to make using just basic Javascript and DOM techniques, plus maybe some jquery. But the developers absolutely wanted to pad their resumes with React above everything else.

sjellis 9y ago
I think that it's always worth remembering the iceberg effect when we talk about trends: the silent majority of developers don't comment on HN or Reddit, don't answer questions on Stack Overflow, don't publish code on GitHub, and are using the same un-hip stacks year-on-year (Java, C#, PHP, maybe Rails, jQuery or Angular). The C# developers that I have spoken to have used Angular for years, like TypeScript, and reach for Angular + TS by default, rather than React + ES6/7. Plenty of Rails developers stick with jQuery, maybe with some CoffeeScript: Rails only "modernized" their JS stack a few months ago.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- timrichard 9y ago
  The last StackOverflow survey showed a much greater dev mindshare for Angular than React, so I'm not sure where the grandparent gets "completely replaced by React & Co"... unless going by HN/Reddit memes/buzz.
aikah 9y ago
There is no holy-grail. One cannot mask his ignorance of the DOM and web API with a front-end framework. Just like one cannot mask his ignorance of HTTP and REST with SPRING,ASP.NET,Django or Rails. you might know how to upload a file with Django API but if you can't do that with a barebone HTTP server then you'll be just another mediocre developer who only knows framework X or Y. Angular and co, it's just like Spring and Co, it's bureaucracy. Some people like bureaucracy, because it make them look busy.

paradite 9y ago

I don't understand why Google has to depreciate something so low level as http client in their frameworks. I've already had enough mess with Android, now the trend comes to Angular. Even after a complete re-write of AngularJS, they still have to do this. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32153318/httpclient-wont-import-in-android-studio https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32153318/httpclient-wont...