3 ms·
I can't speak of Angular since I haven't used it but one problem that is recurring with use frameworks, in general, is that thinking or getting used to "their"
by shubhamjain 12y ago
I can't speak of Angular since I haven't used it but one problem that is recurring with use frameworks, in general, is that thinking or getting used to "their" way takes a significant amount of time and seeing the continuous change of technology, I am not sure that time is justifiable in the longer run.
Take example of rails. I was trying to learn it sometime ago and was really amazed how it has a process for nearly everything. Migrations, asset pipelines, generators, and very extensive command line. Sure it does make it seem like "Once I learn it, it will be so much easy to make the next app" but it is easy to realize after sometime that you have to cross usual hurdles of Googling everything, learning these processes, facing issues, digging out new ways of debugging to finally be good at it.
My idea is that frameworks should be minimal which only ensure a basic working architecture and everything else should be extensible (via packages).
- mattgreenrocks 12y agoThere's a term for minimal frameworks: libraries. Ultimately, you should control the architecture of your application. When this is the case, you can develop abstractions around libraries that shield the rest of your code from their bugs, 'conventions', and error handling strategies.