4 ms·
While going 1.0 is neat, it bugs me that ember-data isn't considered a part of the core. It feels like an important chunk of the framework is missing.
by 1qaz2wsx3edc 14y ago
While going 1.0 is neat, it bugs me that ember-data isn't considered a part of the core. It feels like an important chunk of the framework is missing.
- dryman 14y agoAgree. I would start to use ember only when ember-data was stabilized.
- manmal 14y agoMay I ask why? As I mentioned in the sibling comment, we get along well without it. Also, you could reuse Discourse code instead.
- dryman 14y agoWell, the main reason is I can use angular.js instead. It is hard to find comprehensive documents about how to use ember.js without ember-data. Another reason is ember-data is one of the reasons that I want to use ember-js. I would like to develop a program entirely on fronted then switch to backend. Without ember-data ember.js seems not that attractive to me. It just like...after watching fire-up-ember-js podcast and found out the core feature is not production ready. I'm a little bit upset that I really bought the video..
- psycr 14y agoAngular doesn't have this feature as part of their core library, AFIK.
- brennanm 14y agoI've been using ember-data for a month or so now and it definitely has it's limitations. I'm really looking forward to it being included in the core. They're trying to do that quickly though... emberjs.com/blog/2013/03/22/stabilizing-ember-data.html
- manmal 14y agoIt's not that bad, we are not using ember-data because it's not yet suitable for us (no special handling for significant HTTP errors), but instead we use jQuery callbacks. I think ember-data will be great later on, providing all the Active-Record-like magic, but you really can get along well without it. IIRC Discourse does not use it, either, but has its own model base classes.
- wisesascha 14y agoIt isn't part of the core because they don't want to force you to use Ember Data. Similar to how in rails you can choose to use active record or not. You might ask why not include it in the main file, but let people not use it if they want. You don't want to do that because then the file size will be bigger and make for longer load times.
- applecore 14y agoWe use RJS templates with Ember quite successfully at our startup.
- tomdale 14y agoEmber Data is overkill for many use cases. It may seem counterintuitive, but because Ember's object model is so powerful, you don't need a lot of the model-specific sugar that other libraries provide you—it's baked into every object. To see how easy it is to fetch records using the tools in Ember, see Robin Ward's blog post: http://eviltrout.com/2013/03/23/ember-without-data.html http://eviltrout.com/2013/03/23/ember-without-data.html
- 1qaz2wsx3edc 14y agoYes, but use cases still exist. It seems you're suggesting to manage your data model and wrap it with ember. This is specifically something that makes me feel squeamish. I feel like this is a distinct job for a framework, an important one non-the-less. Without it, you need to do leg work, and projects done in ember will have different implementations, a framework should provide common grammer for common things. Lastly, a data model can provide powerful features and optimizations. I'm probably just reiterating your wish list. Just keep on baking it. :) Thanks for the link, I've read it before, but it was nice to revisit it.
- ef4 14y agoI have a rather large production Ember app that has never used ember-data. I'm glad ember-data is not part of the core, because the split has forced Ember to be cleanly modular, and easy to plug into the backend of your choice. I agree that Ember will be more attractive to new learners once ember-data is fully-baked, but ember-data is actually very ambitious and quite separate from the core competency of what ember.js does.