Reading the jargon in this short thread so far still fills me with dread and fear. I think people who are using (and writing) JS frameworks are to close to their subject to see the bigger picture of what's happening. From a historical, technical and creative perspective, the whole JS ecosystem is like a virus that people have caught that causes hysteria. It's a gigantic wobbling Turboencabulator <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turboencabulator> propped up by a half-baked scripting language a guy wrote as a hobby. If the time comes when I have to put JS on my CV or write JS anything to make a living , then it will be the nail in my retirement coffin.
Some things I want to see before I die are: discovery of extra-terrestrial life, the (peaceful) collapse of the North Korean dictatorship and the extinction of JavaScript. *GK* On 24 August 2017 at 19:04, Tom Rutter <therut...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yep I resisted for a long time and stayed with winforms lol but am now > forced to look at this stuff. > > On Thursday, 24 August 2017, Tony Wright <tonyw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> After doing all the research I chose angular for my current enterprise >> application. I had to choose a technology that could withstand an assault >> from people who are still in a circa 2000 mindset. It's non trivial but >> will do everything I need it to. There's so much to learn just to get going >> on any of the frameworks. >> >> Part of the decision to go with angular is also the proliferation of >> angular 1 apps out there, which was chosen pretty much for the same >> reasons. There will still be years of support required for Angular 1 apps, >> and much work converting them to angular 2, which is really the only path >> available for those apps. >> >> When I first decided to learn angular it was because there were no jobs >> at the time for my traditional Microsoft tech stack. At the time it freaked >> me out as I recognised that the world had moved on and I had to quickly get >> on board or be dead in the water. I analysed the market, figured out where >> the jobs were and viola, the rest is history. >> >> >> >> On 24 Aug 2017 6:39 PM, "Tom Rutter" <therut...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Yep I did notice that in the core 2.0 update. Angular 2/4 never really >>> felt right to me. Aurelia felt much better. I'll have to take a look at Vue >>> now. >>> >>> On Thursday, 24 August 2017, Tony Wright <tonyw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Interestingly, dot net core 2.0, which was released a couple of weeks >>>> ago, only supports react,react+redux and angular 2/4 in its spa templates. >>>> They will work against pure dot net core as well as dot net framework. Both >>>> Vue and react are view only and require a dog's breakfast of technologies >>>> to make up the stack, hence the inclusion of redux, which is now part of >>>> Facebooks offering. Angular is the most complete/enterprise ready of all >>>> the frameworks, but it has its own impediments, predominantly being it's >>>> stupid syntax. Vue is out performing both angular and react at the moment >>>> on github. But stars can be rigged, so I'm prepared to wait a bit longer >>>> before taking a more serious look. >>>> >>>> T. >>>> >>>> On 24 Aug 2017 5:29 PM, "Greg Keogh" <gfke...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/which-javascript-framework-sh >>>>>> ould-i-choose-enterprise-tony-wright >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nice summary, but it seems to confirm my fears that the JS ecosystem >>>>> is still devolving into more fragments. I mean, oh lord, not another one >>>>> ... Vue.js -- *GK* >>>>> >>>>
