Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm one of the people who've built apps with 1.x, and hasn't ever tried subsequent releases. The transition didn't help matters, but it wasn't the reason why I not only have refused to consider it again, I generally don't even consider working for organizations who list it as a part of their stack.

I tend to find that most libraries/frameworks have a few central notions about what the challenge of developing an application in their technical domain is. As far as I was able to tell from working on two projects, Angular's was that JavaScript applications were not written enough like Java applications, or put another way, there were not enough idioms from a static manifestly typed kingdom-of-nouns class-oriented language being used in a dynamically typed first-class-functions-from-the-start prototypes-too language.

TypeScript has its points, there's things to like about it, but its emphasis does the opposite of persuade me that central philosophy has changed. And while I get that complex applications are complex, and most need some organizing principles and Angular is one (or more) of several attempts to figure this out, this one struck me as... not one I wanted to live inside of, to keep things polite.

If I'm wrong about Angular's central philosophy at this point, I'd be interested to hear how.




Ah, a kindred spirit. I too despise Angular’s static-OOP, inversion of control dependency injection framework aspect.

I’m working on two huge projects using AngularJS, but would just as soon do the next with Vue. Hopefully Typescript doesn’t infect that project badly.

Google as an organization seems to have decided that C++ / Java is the one true paradigm for all work.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: