7 ms·

Angular feels like frontend framework built by backend java Spring developers, that hate frontend development.

royjacobs 7y ago
Apart from being verbose, why is that a bad thing? Spring is used to successfully build massive applications. You can meme about Spring's AbstractFactoryBeans all day, but in the end it does what it's supposed to do.
- p2t2p 7y ago
  Recently I had to hide a bunch of functionality for certain license type in a product. Spring + AspectJ turned it into a enjoyable experience - just add one annotation, two classes, one for aspect, another for exception mapper in rest and you can mark any class as "requires certain type of license" in one like of code now.
- scotchbonnet 7y ago
  I maintain a class library that is highly depended upon in the rest of our company. I don't like to introduce dependencies at my later because of that. So things like DI are all factory patterns / builder patterns. It's explicit and has kept my object lifecycle super manageable. It feels like the people who meme about EnterpriseFactoryFactory at times just haven't hit the right use case for it.
  - RhodesianHunter 7y ago
    And if they do ever hit it, having never seen a reason to use it before, they instead layer over it with poorly thought out abstractions leading to unmaintainable code that they'll probably hoist onto the next dev.
  - porker 7y ago
    I'd like to understand this more, as being on the fringe of popular open source projects I think I experience this. Can you expand any further with pseudocode?
- merb 7y ago
  the problem in angular is that it's bloated. and their components generate a load of bloat. Since basically all components have a FactoryComponent thingy, which you don't see, because it gets generated. However a bigger application can easily grow to a few mbs which is a huge no-no for javascript in the browser.
vfc1 7y ago
It feels familiar to Java developers, due to Typescript which is also statically typed (but much better IMHO) and due to the use of decorators and classes, which are an awesome way to describe a component. Being familiar to a large base of existing developers is a huge feature.
- azimuth11 7y ago
  React has also been using classes for a long time (although the trend is to move away from them for performance and simplicity reasons). There is also a huge upward trend of people using TypeScript with React. Personally, after using TypeScript & Angular at work, I've preferred switching to TypeScript when using React in personal projects. My main gripe with Angular (vs. React) has been the lack of first class support for patterns (higher order components) that have been a boon for React. It does look like Angular will have more 1st class support with Ivy[1], however, higher order components are so simple with React (and even better with TS/React). [1]: https://blog.nrwl.io/metaprogramming-higher-order-components-and-mixins-with-angular-ivy-75748fcbc310 https://blog.nrwl.io/metaprogramming-higher-order-components...
  - merb 7y ago
    > although the trend is to move away from them for performance and simplicity reasons I do not think that react classes will go away anytime soon. you can't represent state without them.
    - pennaMan 7y ago
      https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html
    - jaquers 7y ago
      https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html edit: Lol apparently two React devs ears were burning at the same time.
rafaelvasco 7y ago
Front-end development is inherently chaotic right now, doesn't matter the framework. Things will get better.... I'm intrigued by Svelte.
- justanegg 7y ago
  heard of vue?
- benatkin 7y ago
  Front-end development is really great right now, because of React, which makes it so you can develop in one language, but unlike past attempts like GWT [1], doesn't rely on leaky abstractions. 1: http://www.gwtproject.org/overview.html http://www.gwtproject.org/overview.html
  - lostjohnny 7y ago
    JSX is a different language
    - benatkin 7y ago
      JavaScript with JSX is a single language. The tags are a syntax extension. JSX is a very non-leaky abstraction. The tags are just function calls. https://reactjs.org/docs/introducing-jsx.html#jsx-represents-objects https://reactjs.org/docs/introducing-jsx.html#jsx-represents...
      - royjacobs 7y ago
        I don't buy that argument. On the one hand you claim there's no leaky abstraction, yet your argument only works if "Javascript with JSX is a single language". Then "C++ with inline assembler" is also a single language? What about English with quotes in Japanese?
        kaoD 7y ago
        JSX is syntactic sugar for JS[0]. C++ and ASM (actually, _which_ ASM?) are different languages. [0] https://fettblog.eu/jsx-syntactic-sugar/ https://fettblog.eu/jsx-syntactic-sugar/
vikingcaffiene 7y ago
Honestly have you ever built anything of substance w/ it? It’s an awesome framework. You really should give it a try.
- murph-almighty 7y ago
  I detested working in AngularJS but I'm loving 2+. 2+ and NgRx is also pretty nice if you're trying to add state management, although sometimes it just feels like I'm using effects as boilerplate on top of API calls.
romanovcode 7y ago
Great, this is why I think Angular is amazing!
stupidcar 7y ago
This feels like an argument made by somebody who has never built a serious project in either, and has instead formed an opinion based on quick glance at the respective syntaxes. To me, Angular is what HTML and the DOM would look like if they had been designed from the beginning for application development: - Custom elements backed by controller classes. - Data-binding and event-binding syntax baked into HTML - Component style encapsulation, on by default. React seems far more like a project created by people who dislike front-end development: As I recall the genesis of the project was to replace traditional DOM mutation with a more PHP-esque approach of updating state and re-rendering everything, just as you would do on the back-end.
- shadowmint 7y ago
  Why does having a different opinion to you mean someone has no idea what they’re talking about, or has never used a thing “seriously“? I used to love angular, then I got a job which was a “| async” dumpster fire and spent a year watching a team of smart c# developers wallow in a mire of disaster so bad it became a two week regression to change a text field on a form. So full of amazing functional statement no one, even the original authors, could touch it without breaking something in the process. so. Your milage may vary. I no longer particularly like angular, personally, because I find it a chore to herd inexperienced FactoryInjectorConstructorFactoryPattern angular developers into not screwing things up. ...but talented team can do well with it too, and I’ve seen people screw up react projects too. It really is more about good practice and experience than framework, your personal preference is probably, like mine, basically irrelevant.
- zdragnar 7y ago
  I've shipped products using most major FE frameworks. Those things can be had by pretty much any of them. The biggest annoyance with angular is the excessive amount of baggage and boilerplate. Decorators aren't inheritable or composable. Because templates are strings, you need the hacky DI and superfluous module system to avoid tag name clashes. As for React, it is nothing like PHP. JSX is a macro for function calls that return objects; as such they are first-class data structures with all of the benefits you would expect. Yes, it is just a view layer and you need to bring more stuff in if you have a big project planned. If angular floats your boat that's great. The last time I used it was in a team of mostly C#, Java and Python enthusiasts. Once they figured out what was es2015, what was typescript, and what was Angual, the dev experience was generally reviled. (especially once they saw some react code). I generally don't say that I won't work with a technology, but after a year with it (and having years for AngularJS/1.x, React, Ember, Vue and Backbone under my toolbelt) I am content with saying that Angular sits with Backbone at the bottom of the pile of what I would choose to use again.
dio123 7y ago
https://github.com/jhipster/generator-jhipster/issues/9817 https://github.com/jhipster/generator-jhipster/issues/9817 :)
- romanovcode 7y ago
  Have to be honest, had to double check if this project was not satire. https://www.jhipster.tech/ https://www.jhipster.tech/
  - mrec 7y ago
    The name does have a certain https://html9responsiveboilerstrapjs.com/ https://html9responsiveboilerstrapjs.com/ vibe to it, yes.
Tade0 7y ago
My take is that it would have been so much better had the devlopers not elected to bundle Rx.js with it.
adl 7y ago
as a Java Spring Developer that hates frontend development (and loves Java and Spring), I found this very funny :)

Apart from being verbose, why is that a bad thing? Spring is used to successfully build massive applications. You can meme about Spring's AbstractFactoryBeans all day, but in the end it does what it's supposed to do.

p2t2p 7y ago
Recently I had to hide a bunch of functionality for certain license type in a product. Spring + AspectJ turned it into a enjoyable experience - just add one annotation, two classes, one for aspect, another for exception mapper in rest and you can mark any class as "requires certain type of license" in one like of code now.
scotchbonnet 7y ago
I maintain a class library that is highly depended upon in the rest of our company. I don't like to introduce dependencies at my later because of that. So things like DI are all factory patterns / builder patterns. It's explicit and has kept my object lifecycle super manageable. It feels like the people who meme about EnterpriseFactoryFactory at times just haven't hit the right use case for it.
- RhodesianHunter 7y ago
  And if they do ever hit it, having never seen a reason to use it before, they instead layer over it with poorly thought out abstractions leading to unmaintainable code that they'll probably hoist onto the next dev.
- porker 7y ago
  I'd like to understand this more, as being on the fringe of popular open source projects I think I experience this. Can you expand any further with pseudocode?
merb 7y ago
the problem in angular is that it's bloated. and their components generate a load of bloat. Since basically all components have a FactoryComponent thingy, which you don't see, because it gets generated. However a bigger application can easily grow to a few mbs which is a huge no-no for javascript in the browser.

vfc1 7y ago

It feels familiar to Java developers, due to Typescript which is also statically typed (but much better IMHO) and due to the use of decorators and classes, which are an awesome way to describe a component. Being familiar to a large base of existing developers is a huge feature.

azimuth11 7y ago
React has also been using classes for a long time (although the trend is to move away from them for performance and simplicity reasons). There is also a huge upward trend of people using TypeScript with React. Personally, after using TypeScript & Angular at work, I've preferred switching to TypeScript when using React in personal projects. My main gripe with Angular (vs. React) has been the lack of first class support for patterns (higher order components) that have been a boon for React. It does look like Angular will have more 1st class support with Ivy[1], however, higher order components are so simple with React (and even better with TS/React). [1]: https://blog.nrwl.io/metaprogramming-higher-order-components-and-mixins-with-angular-ivy-75748fcbc310 https://blog.nrwl.io/metaprogramming-higher-order-components...
- merb 7y ago
  > although the trend is to move away from them for performance and simplicity reasons I do not think that react classes will go away anytime soon. you can't represent state without them.
  - pennaMan 7y ago
    https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html
  - jaquers 7y ago
    https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html edit: Lol apparently two React devs ears were burning at the same time.

rafaelvasco 7y ago

Front-end development is inherently chaotic right now, doesn't matter the framework. Things will get better.... I'm intrigued by Svelte.

justanegg 7y ago
heard of vue?
benatkin 7y ago
Front-end development is really great right now, because of React, which makes it so you can develop in one language, but unlike past attempts like GWT [1], doesn't rely on leaky abstractions. 1: http://www.gwtproject.org/overview.html http://www.gwtproject.org/overview.html
- lostjohnny 7y ago
  JSX is a different language
  - benatkin 7y ago
    JavaScript with JSX is a single language. The tags are a syntax extension. JSX is a very non-leaky abstraction. The tags are just function calls. https://reactjs.org/docs/introducing-jsx.html#jsx-represents-objects https://reactjs.org/docs/introducing-jsx.html#jsx-represents...
    - royjacobs 7y ago
      I don't buy that argument. On the one hand you claim there's no leaky abstraction, yet your argument only works if "Javascript with JSX is a single language". Then "C++ with inline assembler" is also a single language? What about English with quotes in Japanese?
      - kaoD 7y ago
        JSX is syntactic sugar for JS[0]. C++ and ASM (actually, _which_ ASM?) are different languages. [0] https://fettblog.eu/jsx-syntactic-sugar/ https://fettblog.eu/jsx-syntactic-sugar/

vikingcaffiene 7y ago

Honestly have you ever built anything of substance w/ it? It’s an awesome framework. You really should give it a try.

murph-almighty 7y ago
I detested working in AngularJS but I'm loving 2+. 2+ and NgRx is also pretty nice if you're trying to add state management, although sometimes it just feels like I'm using effects as boilerplate on top of API calls.

romanovcode 7y ago

Great, this is why I think Angular is amazing!

stupidcar 7y ago

This feels like an argument made by somebody who has never built a serious project in either, and has instead formed an opinion based on quick glance at the respective syntaxes. To me, Angular is what HTML and the DOM would look like if they had been designed from the beginning for application development: - Custom elements backed by controller classes. - Data-binding and event-binding syntax baked into HTML - Component style encapsulation, on by default. React seems far more like a project created by people who dislike front-end development: As I recall the genesis of the project was to replace traditional DOM mutation with a more PHP-esque approach of updating state and re-rendering everything, just as you would do on the back-end.

shadowmint 7y ago
Why does having a different opinion to you mean someone has no idea what they’re talking about, or has never used a thing “seriously“? I used to love angular, then I got a job which was a “| async” dumpster fire and spent a year watching a team of smart c# developers wallow in a mire of disaster so bad it became a two week regression to change a text field on a form. So full of amazing functional statement no one, even the original authors, could touch it without breaking something in the process. so. Your milage may vary. I no longer particularly like angular, personally, because I find it a chore to herd inexperienced FactoryInjectorConstructorFactoryPattern angular developers into not screwing things up. ...but talented team can do well with it too, and I’ve seen people screw up react projects too. It really is more about good practice and experience than framework, your personal preference is probably, like mine, basically irrelevant.
zdragnar 7y ago
I've shipped products using most major FE frameworks. Those things can be had by pretty much any of them. The biggest annoyance with angular is the excessive amount of baggage and boilerplate. Decorators aren't inheritable or composable. Because templates are strings, you need the hacky DI and superfluous module system to avoid tag name clashes. As for React, it is nothing like PHP. JSX is a macro for function calls that return objects; as such they are first-class data structures with all of the benefits you would expect. Yes, it is just a view layer and you need to bring more stuff in if you have a big project planned. If angular floats your boat that's great. The last time I used it was in a team of mostly C#, Java and Python enthusiasts. Once they figured out what was es2015, what was typescript, and what was Angual, the dev experience was generally reviled. (especially once they saw some react code). I generally don't say that I won't work with a technology, but after a year with it (and having years for AngularJS/1.x, React, Ember, Vue and Backbone under my toolbelt) I am content with saying that Angular sits with Backbone at the bottom of the pile of what I would choose to use again.

dio123 7y ago

https://github.com/jhipster/generator-jhipster/issues/9817 https://github.com/jhipster/generator-jhipster/issues/9817 :)

romanovcode 7y ago
Have to be honest, had to double check if this project was not satire. https://www.jhipster.tech/ https://www.jhipster.tech/
- mrec 7y ago
  The name does have a certain https://html9responsiveboilerstrapjs.com/ https://html9responsiveboilerstrapjs.com/ vibe to it, yes.

Tade0 7y ago

My take is that it would have been so much better had the devlopers not elected to bundle Rx.js with it.

adl 7y ago

as a Java Spring Developer that hates frontend development (and loves Java and Spring), I found this very funny :)