Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Angular2 - Interested and plans? #33

Open
att3 opened this issue May 6, 2016 · 3 comments
Open

Angular2 - Interested and plans? #33

att3 opened this issue May 6, 2016 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement

Comments

@att3
Copy link

att3 commented May 6, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Angular 2 seems to be very greatly the enchanted version of AngularJS.

Due a fight between angular2 and angularJS, angular2 gets so clear victory, that the frontend should be upgraded to angular 2 at some point.

But.. that isn't easy task, and even angular 2 is still under beta.

So my questions are:

  1. Will this AAC has angular 2, some day?
  2. Is here anyone who is interested in upgrading the frontend to angular 2?

If I were to make one, in the hope of merging it with this repo, do you have any "rules" for how it should be written (mostly, they just ease the job),.. [ex. folder / file structure / builders / typescript? (yes)]
@DSpeichert
Copy link
Member

I think there would certainly be advantages to using Angular 2. However, the main priority when developing DevAAC was the easy of development and understanding. DevAAC is not extremely optimized - it's "okay" but it does not concatenate/minify scripts and CSS.

Therefore, I think using builder/compilers (such as for TypeScript) or any Escmascript >= ES6 is going to be very difficult for any non-hardcore developers to edit.

@Znote
Copy link
Contributor

Znote commented May 7, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Hopefully clients/browsers will start to accept raw typescript compiling, (or better yet, execution if that ever becomes a possibility).

If web development evolves to the state where everyone start using typescript and/or SCSS, why shouldn't browsers support them?

Until then, perhaps something like this can be done:
https://github.com/basarat/typescript-script

Although last time I tried frontend compilation it slowed init down significantly. But has the benefit that new users don't have to go 'hardcore' to edit the code.

More and more SPA JS frameworks start to depend on typescript (or something of the sort), which has me a bit worried.

And nodeJS, so many things built on nodejs or something connected to nodejs. (npm). I wanted to play around with Angular 2 on my droplet, and I found it trickly to do so without downloading and using nodejs and npm to get what I wanted. (Wait what? ... Ahh.. typeScript changes compiling observer...)

Grunt -> nodejs
brunch -> Nodejs
gulp -> nodejs

I'm currently looking for some good frontend only SPA frameworks without any backend stuff and weird dependencies. So far all I got is vanilla ajax through something like jquery. (Which is boring and kinda bad).

@DSpeichert
Copy link
Member

This version of DevAAC was created when bower was not a "mandatory" tools to use. We somehow got away with just linking to CDN in <head> section.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@DSpeichert @Znote @att3