3 ms·
No need to go overboard there Don. In fact, my statement was really intended to mean "minifiable" in the sense of an angular application. That is, following d
by trey-jones 12y ago
No need to go overboard there Don. In fact, my statement was really intended to mean "minifiable" in the sense of an angular application. That is, following documented best practices for writing a minifiable application in angular as described here: https://docs.angularjs.org/tutorial/step_05 https://docs.angularjs.org/tutorial/step_05
- DonHopkins 12y agoBy "especially for simple applications" do you actually mean "only for extremely simple applications"? So do you really believe that the insane scoping madness described in the article, and the fact that Angular's new templates breaks HTML syntax making it impossible to edit/validate/transform/generate/consume them with standard off-the-shelf HTML tools, are really not big issues, and dirt-simple two-way binding outweigh those problems, and are impossible to do without causing those other problems in the first place? Since the order a user fills out text fields on a web page affects the scope in bizarre unexpected ways, shouldn't Angular automatically disable the offending second text field until the first is filled out, and provide tooltips and help text explaining to users why they're disabled, to force users to enter them in the correct order, that will not undermine the intent of the developer? Is that the kind of implicit magic that you expect from your full service front end web development stack, that makes it all worth it in the end? Personally, I'd rather have a scoping mechanism that's less magical and astonishing, and more deterministic and predictable. And a templating system that doesn't forsake and reject the rich existing ecosystem of HTML and XML tools.