Comment by ganarajpr | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ganarajpr | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

  Regarding AngularJS, please use it only if you are new javascript and prefer learning Angular Javascript (which is not javascript by the way) :)

I am not sure you "know" javascript. If you are saying that there is an Angular version of javascript then you are terribly mistaken. Angular is probably one of the only mainstream framework that stays true to javascript. All other frameworks ( Backbone, Ember etc.. ) are the ones that actually mould javascript into an OOP language. I would say that Angular uses the prototype chain ( you know javascript is a prototypical language right? ) the best. The whole scope object inherits prototypicaly while in all other frameworks we create an illusion of OOP. Someone correct me if I am wrong here.

Just for clarity, I believe that when you write Angular code you are writing the purest form of javascript. Because thats what you are writing there. Just plain javascript. There is no constructs imposed by the framework at all. This is probably why most people think "Angular's javascript" is not javascript. They have been always fed layers on top of javascript because "javascript is somehow not optimal, not right" and it has to be "changed" and "corrected" . OOP is shoved down the throat. This is probably gone on to the extent that when someone actually writes in pure javascript it starts looking like a foreign language !!

Before berating other people's knowledge, you should probably make sure that what you are saying is infallible. So with that I ask you:

Do you realise that JS is an object oriented language? Prototypes are a means for inheritance (i.e. reuse of code), just as classes are in more traditional languages - it does not mean JS is not OO.

My interpretation of the GP comment is that he means angular to JS is like jQuery to JS, it's effectively a DSL that you have to learn in itself. Someone once said "people don't write javascript anymore, they write jQuery". That's what I think he meant

Uh, you were the one who suggested JS wasn't OOP-oriented. It's all JS to me. jQuery is just a function that's spits out adapter/decorator objects. Just as Angular, Knockout, Backbone, Ember, etc... are all just bloatworks that miss one critical point. We already had the V and the C pretty well covered. They're throwing a big veil of abstraction over one that was already there and worked fine. It's like webforms all over again only this time we're trying to pretend the client-side isn't already what it is rather than not there at all. And while yes, IMO, we should think of web apps as two separate apps, the client-side's concerns are localized enough that it's kind of silly to try and apply MVC to it (not that what any of this stuff does can really be called MVC or MV-whatever anyway). What is it with modern developers wanting frameworks to be the answer before they understood the question in the question in the first place? How do you even write this stuff without starting to feel a lot silly about the fact that you're just duplicating effort? Because at some point they all have to bind with the mechanisms already in place to bind to their own bindings and that's just stupid.

Are you replying to the correct person? I quite clearly stated JS was OO, whilst the GP clearly says that MV* frameworks "create an illusion of OOP".

If you're not convinced of the benefits of MV* frameworks on the client, please write a complex client-side app with vanilla JS and share what you learnt.

I'm being sincere there - I've tried, and I quickly started drowning in sea of boiler plate code I'd rather not have to write. Not that it's not fun to write some of that stuff, but I'd rather be delivering value. And what happens when I create a second app? Hmm seems there's lot of similar boiler plate stuff, why don't I just abstract that into a framewo.. oh wait

Did you actually read what I wrote? I do agree I missed writing "classical" OOP in there, but I guess I assume wrong when I think that people can fill in the blanks. Here is the jist of what I mentioned earlier - "Most frameworks provide abstractions over javascript that create the illusion of classical OOP".Angular doesnt! . I am talking about prototypes and the prototype chain there? You still think I am just throwing keywords in the air, in that previous sentence and dont understand javascript? You still think I am just writing crap there because ( fill in the blank! )?

Very funny, LOL :). Answer these simple questions with out googling (Be honest :)) and score 80% to get a reply from me.

1) Is MVC an OOP concept ?

2) Is JS an Classical or Functional language ?

3) How does JS support Closures ?

4) What is Unobtrusive JavaScript and why its so popular ?

5) Is it necessary to add declarations in markup or templates to implement bindings in client side ?

6) Differences between Model Backed View and Markup Driven views ?

7) which should be fat in MVC model or controller ?

8) How does multiple controllers in JS MVC App are controlled?

If you answer these questions and score 80%, you will know what i am talking about.

P.S: If you want some, Come on get some :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com