AngularJS - Complex Web Apps Made Simple | Hacker News Reader

AngularJS - Complex Web Apps Made Simple

blogupstairs.com

17 pointsyadirosadi15 comments

Angular JS is what HTML would have been if it had been designed for building web applications. It provides your application’s plumbing so you can focus on what your app does, rather than how to get your web browser to do what you need. it is more a templating system with bidirectional data binding, your model is always the single source of truth for your application state and your view is simply a projection of your model.

Open articleView on HN

I have been using Sammy.js (http://code.quirkey.com/sammy/) for a few weeks now, and I have to say that it really accomplishes "Complex Web Apps Made Simple" but in a flexible way. There are many template engines out there, from Haml to Jade, it really depends on what you are looking for. The nice thing about Sammy.js is that you can use many of the template engines available, or even include your own as a plugin. I personally am looking into ejs since I prefer to write my HTML.

Just for fun I integrated this morning Angular in my "work in progress" wiki.

http://simpliwiki.com/sandbox/AngularHello

Impressive!

Looks very cool and promising! This would work great with node.js I think.

Don't link to blog spam: http://www.angularjs.org/Main_Page

Can anyone compare this with knockoutjs and backbone please?

I can't speak towards either too directly (as I've only used each briefly), but in my experience the concepts of Backbone are a stronger conclusion derived from the same problem that likely sparked AngularJS.

AngularJS essentially has you put a bit of logic into your HTML via parameterization. While I understand where the logic for this type of design seems useful (I've developed similar patterns on my own volition), the model driven pattern Backbone uses offers greater flexibility. For a basic reason, separation of view and data. I also find the nativity of Backbone appealing; Javascript and HTML as they were intended.

On the other hand, in my experience the benefits of parameterization include very easy "out of the box" behavior, which seems to be the more likely (perhaps targeted) use case for AngularJS.

My take was that Angular and Knockout are really about databinding, while Backbone is more of a solid MVC pattern.

Perhaps, but consider that in terms of a client side application, databinding makes up a huge part of the first two layers. Leaving only the controller layer.

The controller still in fact exists in AngularJS, but is moderated by Angular itself. Which is why there are configurations, parameters, rules, etc. This is where you start to sacrifice flexibility for automation.

Edit: It seems Backbone uses a controller to literally describe how the app's routing works. I've never considered routes a controller's job given traditional MVC work (Cake, Lithium, etc). I was using "controller" to describe the event functionality that Backbone views provide (as a controller for how DOM objects behave when you interact with them). I don't think this alters my point much though.

In my experience, it's turned out that the C in MVC isn't actually all that useful for client side web apps. Between routing, nested views, view methods for event handling, and fat models, there isn't much left to control. Active.js dropped the controller a few versions back.

Yes... I'm with you but misspoke, tried to clarify in my edit. I was using "controller" as a term to describe "view methods for event handling". Clear conflict there since Backbone's "controller" is definitively something else.

I actually asked a similar question over on reddit, http://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/f1d6g/databindin... . I'd love to hear more people's thoughts.

This was asked on Quora yesterday: http://www.quora.com/JavaScript/How-do-Angular-js-and-Backbo...

Just so I'm clear on the etiquette at HN... it's acceptable to advertise your own products/work (without a "Review my...")?

I'm not trying to undermine Mr. Rosadi... just curious.

In my opinion, it seems fine for someone to submit their own work under another title than Review / Show HN. I look at the quality of the content rather than title but if the title was overly spammy ("Forget Backbone: Learn about the world's best ....") I'd have an issue with that too.

Yes.

Rosadi didn't write this library, look at his post history... he is a spammer for his blog.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com