Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tony Wright]

The problem is, it's still very much a niche player. It won't get serious
look in in the enterprise predominantly because of that. That's not to say
it isn't an excellent choice. To become a dominant player, you have start
somewhere. That somewhere is really getting traction in the startup market.
Unfortunately, that's dominated at the moment by Vue and React.

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:08 AM, David Gardiner 
wrote:

> A quick check of https://github.com/aurelia/framework/commits/master
> shows that it is very much alive and well and Rob is still active there.
>
> Also, interesting to note that Aurelia does work with ASP.NET Core. True,
> it isn't currently one of the 'out of the box' templates like Angular or
> React but it is supported via the Microsoft.AspNetCore.SpaTemplates
> package.
>
> eg.
>
> dotnet new --install "Microsoft.AspNetCore.SpaTemplates::*"
>
> (See https://github.com/EisenbergEffect/aspnetcore-aurelia-build-2017 for
> more info).
>
> I've been watching it for ages (having liked some of Rob's previous
> efforts in Caliburn Micro when I was doing Windows Phone apps) and just
> recently have had a chance to kick the tyres building a simple 'build
> status dashboard'. I like what I see and it was very easy to get up and
> running.
>
> David
>
>
>
> On 24 August 2017 at 19:37, Tony Wright  wrote:
> >
> > I agree with you Corneliu the angular 2 syntax makes you go "what the
> hell were they thinking!" especially given that angular 1 was far easier,
> far more intuitive to use. But you do get used to it.
>
>> Perhaps Rob Eisenberg is doing something awesome for Microsoft and we'll
>> see some magic there.
>>
>> If Aurelia had the backing of Microsoft I'm sure it would be a different
>> story, as that's the kind of argument they want to hear in the enterprise
>> (angular backed by google, react backed by Facebook, Aurelia backed
>> by...Rob Eisenberg. Hmm. One person? Risky, they say.).
>>
>> There is nothing inherently wrong with Aurelia, it just doesn't have the
>> traction, and traction is most of the game in the enterprise. And react and
>> Vue seem to get all the startup work. But if productivity is the key it is
>> a legitimate choice of you don't have a panel of enterprise architects to
>> convince.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24 Aug 2017 7:48 PM, "Corneliu I. Tusnea" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm one of the lovers of Aurelia (and I know Wal also on this list uses
>> Aurelia).
>>
>> For me Aurelia is has one of the best designs possible. Clean and easy to
>> use. Everything is simply obvious.
>> With Aurelia I never had to think "how do you do this or that". It's all
>> simple and natural.
>> DI is beautiful, binding is obvious, templates are easy to read and the
>> html extensions like `repeat.for`,  `.bind` or `.call' are easy to remember
>> and use.
>> When I look at Angular2 my eyes hurt: *[hidden]* , **ngFor, #field.* I
>> mean, seriously, Angular 2 has an abuse of special characters.
>>
>> With Aurelia, once you learn to build custom attributes and custom
>> elements you exponentially grow productivity.
>>
>> That's my choice :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Keogh  wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>  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  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  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 

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tony Wright]

I added your comment about the quirky syntax to my article.

I also added a section about hot module replacement. I believe the
experience with JavaScript Services is pretty good with Aurelia, which it
still provides support for up on github (they have Aurelia, Vue and
Knockout on a separate branch.) If you haven't tried it, it's definitely
worth it.

Also, I'm wondering if anyone has tried Redux? Redux is a Facebook
technology that manages state in such a way that after hot module
replacement, that state is retained. It is generally used with React, but
can be used with other JavaScript libraries.

An example: with the default JavaScript services template for React+Redux,
you can run the app, go to the counter page and click on the Increment
button and increment the counter. Say after incrementing the counter up to
"5" you then decide to change the code to increment the counter by 3 every
click. After making the change and hitting save, hot module replacement
kicks in automatically, recompiles your code and replaces it in the
browser. With Redux, the value stays at 5, and the next time you click it,
the value will be "8". Without it, it would have to reset back to zero,
which is what it does with all the other JavaScript libraries out of the
box.

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Corneliu I. Tusnea 
wrote:

> I'm one of the lovers of Aurelia (and I know Wal also on this list uses
> Aurelia).
>
> For me Aurelia is has one of the best designs possible. Clean and easy to
> use. Everything is simply obvious.
> With Aurelia I never had to think "how do you do this or that". It's all
> simple and natural.
> DI is beautiful, binding is obvious, templates are easy to read and the
> html extensions like `repeat.for`,  `.bind` or `.call' are easy to remember
> and use.
> When I look at Angular2 my eyes hurt: *[hidden]* , **ngFor, #field.* I
> mean, seriously, Angular 2 has an abuse of special characters.
>
> With Aurelia, once you learn to build custom attributes and custom
> elements you exponentially grow productivity.
>
> That's my choice :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Keogh  wrote:
>
>> 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
>>  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  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  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"  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  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. 

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[David Gardiner]

A quick check of https://github.com/aurelia/framework/commits/master shows
that it is very much alive and well and Rob is still active there.

Also, interesting to note that Aurelia does work with ASP.NET Core. True,
it isn't currently one of the 'out of the box' templates like Angular or
React but it is supported via the Microsoft.AspNetCore.SpaTemplates package.


eg.

dotnet new --install "Microsoft.AspNetCore.SpaTemplates::*"

(See https://github.com/EisenbergEffect/aspnetcore-aurelia-build-2017 for
more info).

I've been watching it for ages (having liked some of Rob's previous efforts
in Caliburn Micro when I was doing Windows Phone apps) and just recently
have had a chance to kick the tyres building a simple 'build status
dashboard'. I like what I see and it was very easy to get up and running.

David


On 24 August 2017 at 19:37, Tony Wright  wrote:
>
> I agree with you Corneliu the angular 2 syntax makes you go "what the
hell were they thinking!" especially given that angular 1 was far easier,
far more intuitive to use. But you do get used to it.

> Perhaps Rob Eisenberg is doing something awesome for Microsoft and we'll
> see some magic there.
>
> If Aurelia had the backing of Microsoft I'm sure it would be a different
> story, as that's the kind of argument they want to hear in the enterprise
> (angular backed by google, react backed by Facebook, Aurelia backed
> by...Rob Eisenberg. Hmm. One person? Risky, they say.).
>
> There is nothing inherently wrong with Aurelia, it just doesn't have the
> traction, and traction is most of the game in the enterprise. And react and
> Vue seem to get all the startup work. But if productivity is the key it is
> a legitimate choice of you don't have a panel of enterprise architects to
> convince.
>
>
>
>
> On 24 Aug 2017 7:48 PM, "Corneliu I. Tusnea" 
> wrote:
>
> I'm one of the lovers of Aurelia (and I know Wal also on this list uses
> Aurelia).
>
> For me Aurelia is has one of the best designs possible. Clean and easy to
> use. Everything is simply obvious.
> With Aurelia I never had to think "how do you do this or that". It's all
> simple and natural.
> DI is beautiful, binding is obvious, templates are easy to read and the
> html extensions like `repeat.for`,  `.bind` or `.call' are easy to remember
> and use.
> When I look at Angular2 my eyes hurt: *[hidden]* , **ngFor, #field.* I
> mean, seriously, Angular 2 has an abuse of special characters.
>
> With Aurelia, once you learn to build custom attributes and custom
> elements you exponentially grow productivity.
>
> That's my choice :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Keogh  wrote:
>
>> 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
>>  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  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  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" 

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tony Wright]

I agree with you Corneliu the angular 2 syntax makes you go "what the hell
were they thinking!" especially given that angular 1 was far easier, far
more intuitive to use. But you do get used to it.

Perhaps Rob Eisenberg is doing something awesome for Microsoft and we'll
see some magic there.

If Aurelia had the backing of Microsoft I'm sure it would be a different
story, as that's the kind of argument they want to hear in the enterprise
(angular backed by google, react backed by Facebook, Aurelia backed
by...Rob Eisenberg. Hmm. One person? Risky, they say.).

There is nothing inherently wrong with Aurelia, it just doesn't have the
traction, and traction is most of the game in the enterprise. And react and
Vue seem to get all the startup work. But if productivity is the key it is
a legitimate choice of you don't have a panel of enterprise architects to
convince.




On 24 Aug 2017 7:48 PM, "Corneliu I. Tusnea"  wrote:

I'm one of the lovers of Aurelia (and I know Wal also on this list uses
Aurelia).

For me Aurelia is has one of the best designs possible. Clean and easy to
use. Everything is simply obvious.
With Aurelia I never had to think "how do you do this or that". It's all
simple and natural.
DI is beautiful, binding is obvious, templates are easy to read and the
html extensions like `repeat.for`,  `.bind` or `.call' are easy to remember
and use.
When I look at Angular2 my eyes hurt: *[hidden]* , **ngFor, #field.* I
mean, seriously, Angular 2 has an abuse of special characters.

With Aurelia, once you learn to build custom attributes and custom elements
you exponentially grow productivity.

That's my choice :)






On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Keogh  wrote:

> 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 
> 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  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  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"  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  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 

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[DotNet Dude]

I must say I agree. I don't know a better alternative but working in JS
land or even TS still feels dirty. This can't be the way it will stay.

On Thursday, 24 August 2017, Greg Keogh  wrote:

> 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 
> 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  > 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 > > 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"  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  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"  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*
>>
>
>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tom Rutter]

Totally agree. First Angular2 and then React almost turned me off Web dev
altogether but Aurelia gave me hope... not so sure now that Aurelia doesn't
look like is getting much love to keep it alive.

On Thursday, 24 August 2017, Corneliu I. Tusnea 
wrote:

> I'm one of the lovers of Aurelia (and I know Wal also on this list uses
> Aurelia).
>
> For me Aurelia is has one of the best designs possible. Clean and easy to
> use. Everything is simply obvious.
> With Aurelia I never had to think "how do you do this or that". It's all
> simple and natural.
> DI is beautiful, binding is obvious, templates are easy to read and the
> html extensions like `repeat.for`,  `.bind` or `.call' are easy to remember
> and use.
> When I look at Angular2 my eyes hurt: *[hidden]* , **ngFor, #field.* I
> mean, seriously, Angular 2 has an abuse of special characters.
>
> With Aurelia, once you learn to build custom attributes and custom
> elements you exponentially grow productivity.
>
> That's my choice :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Keogh  > wrote:
>
>> 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
>>  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 > > 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 >> > 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"  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  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"  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 

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Corneliu I. Tusnea]

I'm one of the lovers of Aurelia (and I know Wal also on this list uses
Aurelia).

For me Aurelia is has one of the best designs possible. Clean and easy to
use. Everything is simply obvious.
With Aurelia I never had to think "how do you do this or that". It's all
simple and natural.
DI is beautiful, binding is obvious, templates are easy to read and the
html extensions like `repeat.for`,  `.bind` or `.call' are easy to remember
and use.
When I look at Angular2 my eyes hurt: *[hidden]* , **ngFor, #field.* I
mean, seriously, Angular 2 has an abuse of special characters.

With Aurelia, once you learn to build custom attributes and custom elements
you exponentially grow productivity.

That's my choice :)






On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Keogh  wrote:

> 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 
> 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  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  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"  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  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"  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*
>>
>
>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tony Wright]

Haha nice. I'm so glad I don't have to use pure javascript. Typescript is
my client language of choice.

The reality is that you can shift a fair bit of workload from the server to
the browser by utilising javascript frameworks, and at the same time get a
much more responsive, rich, snappy web app. (Almost) the only interaction
with the server is via webapi calls. I say almost because I still
personally use the single page cshtml for authentication and authorisation.

Behind webapi I am still using c#, sql server, entity framework, and even
the entity framework canvas.

Quite frankly, I quite enjoy the challenge, but I do wish they would clean
up the syntax as it really is a downer.

On 24 Aug 2017 7:32 PM, "Greg Keogh"  wrote:

> 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 
> 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  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  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"  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  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"  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*
>>
>
>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Greg Keogh]

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 
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  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  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"  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  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"  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*
>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tom Rutter]

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  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"  > 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 > > 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"  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*

>>>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tony Wright]

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"  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  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"  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*
>>>
>>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tom Rutter]

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  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"  > 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*
>>
>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tom Rutter]

Thanks Tony. I will have a look. I tried React and can't believe anyone
would ever bother with it - absolutely atrocious compared to Aurelia!

On Thursday, 24 August 2017, Tony Wright  wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> It doesn't appear to have achieved the take up necessary to make it in the
> enterprise. Also, Rob Eisner has gone and joined Microsoft and doesnt
> appear to have done much with it since.
>
> The three biggest players are now Vue, react and angular.
>
> I wrote an article on this which you can find on my linked in page. I
> tried to remain as balanced as I could. Let me know what you think.
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/which-javascript-framework-should-i-choose-
> enterprise-tony-wright
>
> Kind regards, Tony
>
>
>
> On 24 Aug 2017 3:01 PM, "Tom Rutter"  > wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> I'm loving Aurelia at the moment. I recall a few on this list saying they
>> use it over the Angular and React. Is this still the case? There doesn't
>> seem to be much work for Aurelia devs that I can see...
>>
>> Cheers
>> Tom
>>
>

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Greg Keogh]

>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/which-javascript-framework-should-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*

Re: [OT] Aurelia use

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tom,

It doesn't appear to have achieved the take up necessary to make it in the
enterprise. Also, Rob Eisner has gone and joined Microsoft and doesnt
appear to have done much with it since.

The three biggest players are now Vue, react and angular.

I wrote an article on this which you can find on my linked in page. I tried
to remain as balanced as I could. Let me know what you think.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/which-javascript-framework-should-i-choose-enterprise-tony-wright

Kind regards, Tony



On 24 Aug 2017 3:01 PM, "Tom Rutter"  wrote:

> Hey folks,
>
> I'm loving Aurelia at the moment. I recall a few on this list saying they
> use it over the Angular and React. Is this still the case? There doesn't
> seem to be much work for Aurelia devs that I can see...
>
> Cheers
> Tom
>