5 ms·

Hey pal, drop the chip on your shoulder. Just because AngularJS has wide adoption doesn't change the fact that it is an extremely poorly designed framework. I a

Hey pal, drop the chip on your shoulder. Just because AngularJS has wide adoption doesn't change the fact that it is an extremely poorly designed framework. I also refuse to consider AngularJS jobs. Many developers have had to suffer through bad frameworks like GWT because of industry trends. Those bruises are not badges of honor. ReactJS is a framework that is clearly better designed. Why waste time learning and suffering through AngularJS absurdities when ReactJS exists?

mgkimsal 12y ago
... because jobs? I'm in agreement with your point, but... if 'the market' wants angular... 'the market' is going to have a hell of a time dealing with a mess in a couple of years when many of the decision makers that mandated angular move on to something else and leave piles of mess behind for someone else to clean up.
- emilis_info 12y ago
  There may not be moving on. Or it may take a very long time. Angular is that big already. Previously there was no the framework for web frontend development (like Rails for Ruby). From now on you will need convincing reasons to use anything else, even if it is clearly better. Moving on to something else will be much harder.
  - rimantas 12y ago
    Is it big in production deployments or only in hiring managers wishes?
    - emilis_info 12y ago
      I would like to know an answer to that question. On the other hand my wish is not to get into stupid arguments at my new job :)
- Bahamut 12y ago
  I don't think that problem is restricted to Angular - it's one that you see with when developers wrote unmodular code period. I saw it with legacy ExtJS code.
  - mgkimsal 12y ago
    Oh I completely agree it's not an angular thing. It was a Rails thing, is or will be a 'node' thing, etc. It will be a docker thing at some point too. There's a rush to 'new' that appears to everyone to be 'it', people use 'it' for a bit, realize it doesn't solve all problems, then move on to something else. They've done a lot of learning on someone's dime, moved on, but left a mess of code for someone else to 'maintain' for years. The cycle will continue to repeat itself for a long time...
- jacquesm 12y ago
  > when many of the decision makers that mandated angular move on to something else and leave piles of mess behind for someone else to clean up. That's already happening. Two contacts came up in the last two weeks with Angular projects gone off the rails (pun intended).
Jgrubb 12y ago
I don't have a chip on my shoulder. It just reminds me of that old comeback for people who are complaining about how terrible PHP is - "oh, I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you over all the work I was getting done with it." > Why waste time learning and suffering through AngularJS absurdities when ReactJS exists? Because I'd have to suffer through learning and integrating Backbone or Flux in addition to React to accomplish what I could by learning just Angular. And then I'd have to hope that my choices remained compatible with each other through version updates. Anyway, I may find React to be a better designed lib when I get around to using it, but it's definitely not an apples to apples comparison when it's only attempting to tackle 1 of the pieces that Angular handles.

mgkimsal 12y ago

... because jobs? I'm in agreement with your point, but... if 'the market' wants angular... 'the market' is going to have a hell of a time dealing with a mess in a couple of years when many of the decision makers that mandated angular move on to something else and leave piles of mess behind for someone else to clean up.

emilis_info 12y ago
There may not be moving on. Or it may take a very long time. Angular is that big already. Previously there was no the framework for web frontend development (like Rails for Ruby). From now on you will need convincing reasons to use anything else, even if it is clearly better. Moving on to something else will be much harder.
- rimantas 12y ago
  Is it big in production deployments or only in hiring managers wishes?
  - emilis_info 12y ago
    I would like to know an answer to that question. On the other hand my wish is not to get into stupid arguments at my new job :)
Bahamut 12y ago
I don't think that problem is restricted to Angular - it's one that you see with when developers wrote unmodular code period. I saw it with legacy ExtJS code.
- mgkimsal 12y ago
  Oh I completely agree it's not an angular thing. It was a Rails thing, is or will be a 'node' thing, etc. It will be a docker thing at some point too. There's a rush to 'new' that appears to everyone to be 'it', people use 'it' for a bit, realize it doesn't solve all problems, then move on to something else. They've done a lot of learning on someone's dime, moved on, but left a mess of code for someone else to 'maintain' for years. The cycle will continue to repeat itself for a long time...
jacquesm 12y ago
> when many of the decision makers that mandated angular move on to something else and leave piles of mess behind for someone else to clean up. That's already happening. Two contacts came up in the last two weeks with Angular projects gone off the rails (pun intended).

Jgrubb 12y ago

I don't have a chip on my shoulder. It just reminds me of that old comeback for people who are complaining about how terrible PHP is - "oh, I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you over all the work I was getting done with it." > Why waste time learning and suffering through AngularJS absurdities when ReactJS exists? Because I'd have to suffer through learning and integrating Backbone or Flux in addition to React to accomplish what I could by learning just Angular. And then I'd have to hope that my choices remained compatible with each other through version updates. Anyway, I may find React to be a better designed lib when I get around to using it, but it's definitely not an apples to apples comparison when it's only attempting to tackle 1 of the pieces that Angular handles.