11 ms·

Learn AngularJS

139 points by tilt 12y ago

waitingkuo 12y ago
Is it Angular 1.x or 2.0?
- sehr 12y ago
  1.x
  - bshimmin 12y ago
    It ought to mention this somewhere, no? Otherwise I suspect some people might feel they'd wasted 5 hours learning a possibly-soon-to-be-outdated technology. (This would be less important for Rails, say, where the changes between 4 and the next major release - or even between 3 and 4 - would be less drastic.)
    - nstokoe 12y ago
      Agreed. It would also be nice to see some resources on getting ready for 2, perhaps a course on ecmascript 6.
    - mangoman 12y ago
      The Angular team has said a few times that they're committed to supporting 1.x for a long time[1] since they use 1.x a ton. Also the design for 2.0 hasn't been completed yet, so it'd be a bit premature to cover it in a codeacademy course [1]http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2014/10/ng-europe-angular-13-and-beyond.html http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2014/10/ng-europe-angular-13-a...
      - bshimmin 12y ago
        I agree there shouldn't be a course covering Angular 2.0 yet. But I would also say that any course that you can start today which covers Angular 1.x probably should mention (in big text!) that there's a big new version of Angular coming out in the not-too-distant future and that it is fundamentally very different from the current version of Angular. I feel less bad about companies being screwed over by this sort of massive change - any tech manager/architect/lead who is researching what JavaScript stacks to choose for future projects should either already know about Angular 2.0 or have the available means to find out about it (and if they either don't or can't, they're basically just bad at the job they're being paid to do) - but for students, in any sense of the word, it's a different matter.
    - cbee17 12y ago
      You're right, we probably ought to mention that in the description, regardless of how long the Angular team will be supporting 1.x. Sending that feedback to the content team. ETA: http://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-angularjs http://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-angularjs "Learn how to build web apps using AngularJS 1.x. By the end of the course, you'll be able to use AngularJS to create powerful apps of your own."
      - bshimmin 12y ago
        Great! Well done.
  - ExpiredLink 12y ago
    I still see many courses being offered for Angular 1. People are probably interested in learning 1 because demand is still high.
andrewrice 12y ago
For those interested in learning Angular, here's a compilation of resources you might find useful: https://github.com/timjacobi/angular-education https://github.com/timjacobi/angular-education
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
waitingkuo 12y ago
The platform to teach angular.js is built with Reactjs[1]. That's interesting. [1]http://www.infoq.com/articles/reactjs-codecademy http://www.infoq.com/articles/reactjs-codecademy
- artursapek 12y ago
  I did a write-up recently about how and why we're using React. You can read it here. http://artur.co/articles/moving-codecademy-to-es6-webpack-and-react/ http://artur.co/articles/moving-codecademy-to-es6-webpack-an...
hippich 12y ago
If you don't know anything about client-side frameworks and consider Angular as your first one, keep in mind following: * This is Angular 1.x course. Angular 2, which is in the development right now, totally different. * Knowledge you learn from using Angular is unlikely to be applicable to any other client-side framework, as original creators invented many new terminology as well as their approach to many things is unique (not necessarily in a good way) * A lot of "magic" will prevent you from understanding what is really going on behind scene.
- fridek 12y ago
  This is Angular 1.x course because Angular 2 is nowhere near stability. It also won't be for another few years - that's how long it takes to build an ecosystem of packages around anything. I'd say apart from people wanting to contribute to Angular 2, or maintaining packages that may need to be ported to Angular 2, nobody should learn it right now. The other two arguments are actually not in favor of the point you are trying to make. For beginner wanting to just have something awesome working, Angular is a perfect way of getting hooked. Sure, for senior JS developers learning Angular is perhaps not the best move - it is very isolated, built on assumptions suited mostly for small websites and, as you said it, "magic". Those are the reasons why Angular 2 is so different.
  - lobo_tuerto 12y ago
    Not to rain on your parade but, would you call Google Cloud Platform's client-side a small site? What are your arguments for claiming that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVTN8msr5DE&list=PLOETEcp3DkCoNnlhE-7fovYvqwVPrRiY7&index=22 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVTN8msr5DE&list=PLOETEcp3Dk...
    - hippich 12y ago
      Is there place to look at actual product, without being paid client? I am looking right now at Console and it is indeed very simple app. I am desperately looking for indeed large projects made with angular 1.x because company I work for is in the middle of pretty large project where we stumble upon many angular shortcomings which I have no idea if even worth trying to search for solution.
ebbv 12y ago
Yeah learning Angular 1.x right now is pretty much a waste of time. I learned it last year and feel like a sucker due to the drastic changes in 2.
- ExpiredLink 12y ago
  But demand for Angular 1 is still high. Who knows if 2 will be such a great success.
  - ebbv 12y ago
    Google's abandoning Angular 1.x, IMHO it's foolish to try to hang on to it.
    - MollyR 12y ago
      I agree. My company also felt really burned when hearing Angular 2 is not backwards compatible. Probably going to be looking into React now.
      - s_baby 12y ago
        Why? React isn't a full framework and solves a completely different problem.
        Uroboric 12y ago
        It's fairly simple to piece together a framework with React. I'm using React, Flux, React-Router and Superagent.
        andrewrice 12y ago
        Hi s_baby, can you elaborate on some of the problems each is suited for? I've been considering diving into React for a few weeks now.
        MollyR 12y ago
        A lot of time was spent training people on angular. Angular being so big meant more training. I'm guessing our Tech Leads are more comfortable with React because it isn't a framework. The main issue stemmed from research, development, and training costs from what I understand.
ph4 12y ago
So what should we be learning if we want to be exposed to high-level, highly-transferrable concepts related to front-end frameworks?
charlysisto 12y ago
Right now on HN "Learn AngularJS" is standing right above "Don't React" :-)
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- EugeneOZ 12y ago
  Actually this thread is full of comments "don't use AngularJS, use my favorite SomeJS".
davexunit 12y ago
Don't bother. Spend time with a JavaScript framework that will actually reward your time spent. AngularJS 1.x has a steep learning curve due to over-engineering, a terrible templating system, and is completely incompatible with the upcoming AngularJS 2.x series. If you're looking for your very first single-page application library, try MithrilJS. It's small and easy to pick up quickly: https://lhorie.github.io/mithril/ https://lhorie.github.io/mithril/
- tomjen3 12y ago
  Sadly that library misses the point: MVVM. With angular I get to tie my user interface to my model in a declarative way, my model doesn't really have to be anything but a simple javascript object, I can use straight html to design the interface and when something changes I don't have to think about it. If you haven't ever worked with MVVM, do so. It is a treat.
  - davexunit 12y ago
    >Sadly that library misses the point: MVVM. I don't understand. Mithril also allows for clean separation of view and model, typically in a functional and declarative manner. >If you haven't ever worked with MVVM, do so. It is a treat. I worked with it for quite some time at a past job which gave me my strong opinions about the uselessness of Angular.
    - misterbwong 12y ago
      Agreed. I want to say grandparent actually means automatic two-way model binding, not MVVM.
  - lhorie 12y ago
    Hi, Mithril author here. `ng-model` is actually one of the "magic" things that @hippich is warning against. Having used Angular (and built Mithril based on lessons learned from using it for a few years), I agree bindings are handy in a lot of cases. That is, until you need to work around them (maybe because your inputs are laggy, or you've hit the infamous 2000-binding-ceiling, or whatever). Then, they're not such a treat anymore. With Mithril (and fwiw, other virtual dom libraries as well), you can choose to add the convenience of bindings where you find appropriate. The points about POJOs and HTML syntax are, similarly, aspects that you have control over.
esseti 12y ago
when will the angular 2 release? i just (10 minutes ago) complete the first course on codeschool. but since there's this big change i'll wait before taking the next one.
- eanplatter 12y ago
  I believe it's to be released later this year. If you're learning front end frameworks thought 1.x still isn't a bad bet. Angular2 is going to be dramatically different, and because of that, they are going to maintain 1.x for quite some time after 2 is released. Also, the job market for Angular developers is high, and a lot of those companies wont be migrating instantly. If you're looking to get into the field 1.x isn't a bad bet. You'll have to learn Angular2 someday, but then again, the life of a front end developer is constantly learning new frameworks / technologies.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
SFjulie1 12y ago
Learn angular, we need moare minions to overcome the world with insanity. Anarchy! Angular has been created by the illuminatis to drive people crazy, help them, help the chaos spread the world. Mouhahahahah (Yes I can do angular, and yes it is insanely complex and shitty with a lot of Java desgin patterns like IoC from the GoF that are very suitable for java, but totally useless in javascript... Someone still must think we are in the 90's and that the java in javascript means they are related)
borgia 12y ago
To those saying don't learn angular, which frameworks would you suggest instead?
- UUMMUU 12y ago
  As many people are echoing in the comments, I'd go with React just because it's so easy to get started with. Once you get into it, the Flux pattern is pretty sweet although it's being morphed to use Relay/Graphql which are pretty creative. Also, React Native is the new way they're proposing to build native mobile apps; definitely new but worth it to learn React in case this works out. I would definitely push people towards learning Meteor. I know it's a full stack framework instead of just a front end framework but for rapid prototyping, it's fantastic. The community for Meteor is a bit hit or miss because it's so "magical" but it's worth a look too. Disclaimer: I've only ever done about a week of Angular so I cannot compare features.
  - megaman821 12y ago
    Angular vs React isn't a great comparison. For all but the most trivial of apps you will need to use a lot of ancillary libraries. It is more like: * React * React-Router * JQuery (for the AJAX functionality) * A library for or to help build Observables like EventEmitter, RxJS, or BaconJS * Immutable.js is useful in many projects There are also many patterns that have cropped up with React like Flux or Container-Component. For a newbie, getting started with Angular is much easier.
    - hajile 12y ago
      Angular really needs ui-router, lodash/ramda, and jquery (for more than just AJAX). React doesn't need a router for many uses (extending existing sites), but does need lodash/ramda and an AJAX library. ImmutableJS is useful for both angular and react (as is rxjs/baconjs). For a beginner, I would simply say React, Reflux, Ramda, and jQuery will do 90% of the things. Learning all four of these libraries (they probably already know jQuery) will take less time than Angular and be more flexible if they want to swap one out later. Finally, adding these is much easier with commonJS than the angular dependency injection (often on top of commonJS).
PopsiclePete 12y ago
Is there an actual reason to use AngularJS that's not just hype? It seems incredibly over-engineered to me, compared to something like React. I realize it's the newest, coolest thing, but...why?
- WolfeReader 12y ago
  AngularJS empowers your HTML. Done right, your JavaScript files are concerned only with retrieving/manipulating data, and your UI code fits snugly into your UI description. Compared to managing the DOM in both your HTML and your JavaScript files, AngularJS seems so much better organized.
- jimlei 12y ago
  React even say themselves they're just the V in MVC. Angular is full stack. What you need and which is best is probably up to yourself to answer. I personally found it nice that angular is a working framework, instead of having to piece together a framework myself using react++
- EugeneOZ 12y ago
  Too late to ask this question, actually. In 2011 this question could be valid, but not in 2015. Hype can't last so long.
- sergiotapia 12y ago
  I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, what does React do exactly - what does it replace? I read the landing page a couple of times and I don't quite understand what it's supposed to solve.
  - PopsiclePete 12y ago
    React allows you to build stateful javascript components in a nice manner. Think change propagation. You have a visual tree of a parent component and many child components. React makes it really nice, easy, and fast to propagate changes up and down your visual tree. Very MVVM-like, to me. You change some state, and React takes care of updating the appropriate visual components. This is achieved with some custom syntax and also a fake/virtual DOM that you work with. The gain from all this is speed. It's impressively fast, in fact.
Sharma 12y ago
Every time a new framework appears, it feels like this is it. But as time passes you start seeing people's feedback and experiences. I see same pattern for AngularJS, Backbone.js and the recent one React. So, the point is, don't believe the hype, try yourself and then decide if it is for you or not.

Learn AngularJS

139 points by tilt 12y ago

waitingkuo 12y ago

Is it Angular 1.x or 2.0?

sehr 12y ago
1.x
- bshimmin 12y ago
  It ought to mention this somewhere, no? Otherwise I suspect some people might feel they'd wasted 5 hours learning a possibly-soon-to-be-outdated technology. (This would be less important for Rails, say, where the changes between 4 and the next major release - or even between 3 and 4 - would be less drastic.)
  - nstokoe 12y ago
    Agreed. It would also be nice to see some resources on getting ready for 2, perhaps a course on ecmascript 6.
  - mangoman 12y ago
    The Angular team has said a few times that they're committed to supporting 1.x for a long time[1] since they use 1.x a ton. Also the design for 2.0 hasn't been completed yet, so it'd be a bit premature to cover it in a codeacademy course [1]http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2014/10/ng-europe-angular-13-and-beyond.html http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2014/10/ng-europe-angular-13-a...
    - bshimmin 12y ago
      I agree there shouldn't be a course covering Angular 2.0 yet. But I would also say that any course that you can start today which covers Angular 1.x probably should mention (in big text!) that there's a big new version of Angular coming out in the not-too-distant future and that it is fundamentally very different from the current version of Angular. I feel less bad about companies being screwed over by this sort of massive change - any tech manager/architect/lead who is researching what JavaScript stacks to choose for future projects should either already know about Angular 2.0 or have the available means to find out about it (and if they either don't or can't, they're basically just bad at the job they're being paid to do) - but for students, in any sense of the word, it's a different matter.
  - cbee17 12y ago
    You're right, we probably ought to mention that in the description, regardless of how long the Angular team will be supporting 1.x. Sending that feedback to the content team. ETA: http://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-angularjs http://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-angularjs "Learn how to build web apps using AngularJS 1.x. By the end of the course, you'll be able to use AngularJS to create powerful apps of your own."
    - bshimmin 12y ago
      Great! Well done.
- ExpiredLink 12y ago
  I still see many courses being offered for Angular 1. People are probably interested in learning 1 because demand is still high.

andrewrice 12y ago

For those interested in learning Angular, here's a compilation of resources you might find useful: https://github.com/timjacobi/angular-education https://github.com/timjacobi/angular-education

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

waitingkuo 12y ago

The platform to teach angular.js is built with Reactjs[1]. That's interesting. [1]http://www.infoq.com/articles/reactjs-codecademy http://www.infoq.com/articles/reactjs-codecademy

artursapek 12y ago
I did a write-up recently about how and why we're using React. You can read it here. http://artur.co/articles/moving-codecademy-to-es6-webpack-and-react/ http://artur.co/articles/moving-codecademy-to-es6-webpack-an...

hippich 12y ago

If you don't know anything about client-side frameworks and consider Angular as your first one, keep in mind following: * This is Angular 1.x course. Angular 2, which is in the development right now, totally different. * Knowledge you learn from using Angular is unlikely to be applicable to any other client-side framework, as original creators invented many new terminology as well as their approach to many things is unique (not necessarily in a good way) * A lot of "magic" will prevent you from understanding what is really going on behind scene.

fridek 12y ago
This is Angular 1.x course because Angular 2 is nowhere near stability. It also won't be for another few years - that's how long it takes to build an ecosystem of packages around anything. I'd say apart from people wanting to contribute to Angular 2, or maintaining packages that may need to be ported to Angular 2, nobody should learn it right now. The other two arguments are actually not in favor of the point you are trying to make. For beginner wanting to just have something awesome working, Angular is a perfect way of getting hooked. Sure, for senior JS developers learning Angular is perhaps not the best move - it is very isolated, built on assumptions suited mostly for small websites and, as you said it, "magic". Those are the reasons why Angular 2 is so different.
- lobo_tuerto 12y ago
  Not to rain on your parade but, would you call Google Cloud Platform's client-side a small site? What are your arguments for claiming that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVTN8msr5DE&list=PLOETEcp3DkCoNnlhE-7fovYvqwVPrRiY7&index=22 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVTN8msr5DE&list=PLOETEcp3Dk...
  - hippich 12y ago
    Is there place to look at actual product, without being paid client? I am looking right now at Console and it is indeed very simple app. I am desperately looking for indeed large projects made with angular 1.x because company I work for is in the middle of pretty large project where we stumble upon many angular shortcomings which I have no idea if even worth trying to search for solution.

ebbv 12y ago

Yeah learning Angular 1.x right now is pretty much a waste of time. I learned it last year and feel like a sucker due to the drastic changes in 2.

ExpiredLink 12y ago
But demand for Angular 1 is still high. Who knows if 2 will be such a great success.
- ebbv 12y ago
  Google's abandoning Angular 1.x, IMHO it's foolish to try to hang on to it.
  - MollyR 12y ago
    I agree. My company also felt really burned when hearing Angular 2 is not backwards compatible. Probably going to be looking into React now.
    - s_baby 12y ago
      Why? React isn't a full framework and solves a completely different problem.
      - Uroboric 12y ago
        It's fairly simple to piece together a framework with React. I'm using React, Flux, React-Router and Superagent.
      - andrewrice 12y ago
        Hi s_baby, can you elaborate on some of the problems each is suited for? I've been considering diving into React for a few weeks now.
      - MollyR 12y ago
        A lot of time was spent training people on angular. Angular being so big meant more training. I'm guessing our Tech Leads are more comfortable with React because it isn't a framework. The main issue stemmed from research, development, and training costs from what I understand.

ph4 12y ago

So what should we be learning if we want to be exposed to high-level, highly-transferrable concepts related to front-end frameworks?

charlysisto 12y ago

Right now on HN "Learn AngularJS" is standing right above "Don't React" :-)

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
EugeneOZ 12y ago
Actually this thread is full of comments "don't use AngularJS, use my favorite SomeJS".

davexunit 12y ago

Don't bother. Spend time with a JavaScript framework that will actually reward your time spent. AngularJS 1.x has a steep learning curve due to over-engineering, a terrible templating system, and is completely incompatible with the upcoming AngularJS 2.x series. If you're looking for your very first single-page application library, try MithrilJS. It's small and easy to pick up quickly: https://lhorie.github.io/mithril/ https://lhorie.github.io/mithril/

tomjen3 12y ago
Sadly that library misses the point: MVVM. With angular I get to tie my user interface to my model in a declarative way, my model doesn't really have to be anything but a simple javascript object, I can use straight html to design the interface and when something changes I don't have to think about it. If you haven't ever worked with MVVM, do so. It is a treat.
- davexunit 12y ago
  >Sadly that library misses the point: MVVM. I don't understand. Mithril also allows for clean separation of view and model, typically in a functional and declarative manner. >If you haven't ever worked with MVVM, do so. It is a treat. I worked with it for quite some time at a past job which gave me my strong opinions about the uselessness of Angular.
  - misterbwong 12y ago
    Agreed. I want to say grandparent actually means automatic two-way model binding, not MVVM.
- lhorie 12y ago
  Hi, Mithril author here. `ng-model` is actually one of the "magic" things that @hippich is warning against. Having used Angular (and built Mithril based on lessons learned from using it for a few years), I agree bindings are handy in a lot of cases. That is, until you need to work around them (maybe because your inputs are laggy, or you've hit the infamous 2000-binding-ceiling, or whatever). Then, they're not such a treat anymore. With Mithril (and fwiw, other virtual dom libraries as well), you can choose to add the convenience of bindings where you find appropriate. The points about POJOs and HTML syntax are, similarly, aspects that you have control over.

esseti 12y ago

when will the angular 2 release? i just (10 minutes ago) complete the first course on codeschool. but since there's this big change i'll wait before taking the next one.

eanplatter 12y ago
I believe it's to be released later this year. If you're learning front end frameworks thought 1.x still isn't a bad bet. Angular2 is going to be dramatically different, and because of that, they are going to maintain 1.x for quite some time after 2 is released. Also, the job market for Angular developers is high, and a lot of those companies wont be migrating instantly. If you're looking to get into the field 1.x isn't a bad bet. You'll have to learn Angular2 someday, but then again, the life of a front end developer is constantly learning new frameworks / technologies.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

SFjulie1 12y ago

Learn angular, we need moare minions to overcome the world with insanity. Anarchy! Angular has been created by the illuminatis to drive people crazy, help them, help the chaos spread the world. Mouhahahahah (Yes I can do angular, and yes it is insanely complex and shitty with a lot of Java desgin patterns like IoC from the GoF that are very suitable for java, but totally useless in javascript... Someone still must think we are in the 90's and that the java in javascript means they are related)

borgia 12y ago

To those saying don't learn angular, which frameworks would you suggest instead?

UUMMUU 12y ago
As many people are echoing in the comments, I'd go with React just because it's so easy to get started with. Once you get into it, the Flux pattern is pretty sweet although it's being morphed to use Relay/Graphql which are pretty creative. Also, React Native is the new way they're proposing to build native mobile apps; definitely new but worth it to learn React in case this works out. I would definitely push people towards learning Meteor. I know it's a full stack framework instead of just a front end framework but for rapid prototyping, it's fantastic. The community for Meteor is a bit hit or miss because it's so "magical" but it's worth a look too. Disclaimer: I've only ever done about a week of Angular so I cannot compare features.
- megaman821 12y ago
  Angular vs React isn't a great comparison. For all but the most trivial of apps you will need to use a lot of ancillary libraries. It is more like: * React * React-Router * JQuery (for the AJAX functionality) * A library for or to help build Observables like EventEmitter, RxJS, or BaconJS * Immutable.js is useful in many projects There are also many patterns that have cropped up with React like Flux or Container-Component. For a newbie, getting started with Angular is much easier.
  - hajile 12y ago
    Angular really needs ui-router, lodash/ramda, and jquery (for more than just AJAX). React doesn't need a router for many uses (extending existing sites), but does need lodash/ramda and an AJAX library. ImmutableJS is useful for both angular and react (as is rxjs/baconjs). For a beginner, I would simply say React, Reflux, Ramda, and jQuery will do 90% of the things. Learning all four of these libraries (they probably already know jQuery) will take less time than Angular and be more flexible if they want to swap one out later. Finally, adding these is much easier with commonJS than the angular dependency injection (often on top of commonJS).

PopsiclePete 12y ago

Is there an actual reason to use AngularJS that's not just hype? It seems incredibly over-engineered to me, compared to something like React. I realize it's the newest, coolest thing, but...why?

WolfeReader 12y ago
AngularJS empowers your HTML. Done right, your JavaScript files are concerned only with retrieving/manipulating data, and your UI code fits snugly into your UI description. Compared to managing the DOM in both your HTML and your JavaScript files, AngularJS seems so much better organized.
jimlei 12y ago
React even say themselves they're just the V in MVC. Angular is full stack. What you need and which is best is probably up to yourself to answer. I personally found it nice that angular is a working framework, instead of having to piece together a framework myself using react++
EugeneOZ 12y ago
Too late to ask this question, actually. In 2011 this question could be valid, but not in 2015. Hype can't last so long.
sergiotapia 12y ago
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, what does React do exactly - what does it replace? I read the landing page a couple of times and I don't quite understand what it's supposed to solve.
- PopsiclePete 12y ago
  React allows you to build stateful javascript components in a nice manner. Think change propagation. You have a visual tree of a parent component and many child components. React makes it really nice, easy, and fast to propagate changes up and down your visual tree. Very MVVM-like, to me. You change some state, and React takes care of updating the appropriate visual components. This is achieved with some custom syntax and also a fake/virtual DOM that you work with. The gain from all this is speed. It's impressively fast, in fact.

Sharma 12y ago

Every time a new framework appears, it feels like this is it. But as time passes you start seeing people's feedback and experiences. I see same pattern for AngularJS, Backbone.js and the recent one React. So, the point is, don't believe the hype, try yourself and then decide if it is for you or not.