|
Vincent Valentine posted:Do the udemy course or whatever, but I very strongly recommend you just build poo poo 8 hours a day until you get hired. Angular 1 and 2 are the two frameworks where it was extremely apparent to me that the relatively shallow knowledge that internet tutorials give you was insufficient. You really gotta get stuck into it, get frustrated with things not working the way you want, and figure them out afterwards. I'd love to be able to dump that much time into it every day but it's going to be enough of a struggle as it is to fit in those 10 hours of Udemy poo poo. But I get where you're coming from. As I said I was incredibly honest with the employer about where I was with Angular (think Codeacademy's angular JS course in terms of depth, maybe a little more but not much) and I actually think my no-bullshit truthfulness about how low I was starting off on the totem pole may have actually landed me the job.
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 09:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 11:33 |
|
|
Ape Fist posted:I'd love to be able to dump that much time into it every day but it's going to be enough of a struggle as it is to fit in those 10 hours of Udemy poo poo. But I get where you're coming from. As I said I was incredibly honest with the employer about where I was with Angular (think Codeacademy's angular JS course in terms of depth, maybe a little more but not much) and I actually think my no-bullshit truthfulness about how low I was starting off on the totem pole may have actually landed me the job. That. And the fact they probably got you cheap.  The Udemy course isn't bad. It will be good enough to get you started at least. Just prepare for a lot of refactoring as you learn the "right" way to do things, or even just "better" ways. bvj191jgl7bBsqF5m posted:For a first job, which would you take? Definitely don't take an Angular 1 job in TYOOL 2018. Take the other one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 13:29
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:I'd love to be able to dump that much time into it every day but it's going to be enough of a struggle as it is to fit in those 10 hours of Udemy poo poo. But I get where you're coming from. As I said I was incredibly honest with the employer about where I was with Angular (think Codeacademy's angular JS course in terms of depth, maybe a little more but not much) and I actually think my no-bullshit truthfulness about how low I was starting off on the totem pole may have actually landed me the job. I got hired to do React and Django and I had finished about 5% of a React project and 1 django project. I got hired because of culture fit and that they knew I could pick the stuff up eventually. Don't sweat it. And worst case scenario, if they let you go (happened to me) or some other terribleness, know that you got paid to continue to learn and you'll have a much easier time landing the next gig.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 15:15
|
|
|
huhu posted:I got hired to do React and Django and I had finished about 5% of a React project and 1 django project. I got hired because of culture fit and that they knew I could pick the stuff up eventually. Don't sweat it. And worst case scenario, if they let you go (happened to me) or some other terribleness, know that you got paid to continue to learn and you'll have a much easier time landing the next gig. Yeah I'm here for the learning opportunity big time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
HaB posted:Definitely don't take an Angular 1 job in TYOOL 2018. Take the other one. Depends, if he can manage an upgrade from Angular 1 to Angular 2/4/5, he would get some awesome experience that will set his resume for the next 5 years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Skandranon posted:Depends, if he can manage an upgrade from Angular 1 to Angular 2/4/5, he would get some awesome experience that will set his resume for the next 5 years. Perhaps, but I would want to see it written down somewhere on the actual real-world Road Map for the next 6 months, AND see evidence that the same Road Map is actually being USED. Otherwise, that's a never ending hell of "we'll upgrade when we can devote some resources to it" which is code for "lol never" then 3 years from now all he knows is Angular 1 and can't find another job anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
HaB posted:Perhaps, but I would want to see it written down somewhere on the actual real-world Road Map for the next 6 months, AND see evidence that the same Road Map is actually being USED. If people keep saying "lol never" to upgrading then there will always be jobs for Angular 1.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
what is the raddest way to do CSS-in-JS as of January 11th, 2018?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
prom candy posted:what is the raddest way to do CSS-in-JS as of January 11th, 2018? Use AJAX to dynamically fetch CSS fragments from a REST backend.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
GET api/v1/header/h1/fontSize
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
bvj191jgl7bBsqF5m posted:I'm a self-taught dev who is negotiating 2 job offers. Both are small start-ups, one is very well-funded, uses a library I'm familiar with (React), has very good benefits and stuff like unlimited vacation time (minimum 3 weeks), is in a hip location downtown. The company is 4 people with 1 coder after downsizing from 20ish and changing focus. The first offer seems pretty fun but the second company seems a bit more stable from a surface reading so factor that into your decision.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/01/11/brutal-lifecycle-javascript-frameworks/
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Alright let me rephrase that: are any of you guys doing CSS-in-JS? If so what are you using?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
prom candy posted:Alright let me rephrase that: are any of you guys doing CSS-in-JS? If so what are you using? If you're asking broadly... React with Styled components. Create an HTML element directly tied to an a tag as a JavaScript const. No classnames no separate HTML, CSS, and JS files. I love it. code:
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
Going through the Udemy Angular 2 course and it's pretty loving cool, only in as far as (EventBinding) and [PropertyBinding] but as I get into it all I can think is that JavaScript has lost the run of itself and wandered off to a strange place where it's developing wild notions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:Going through the Udemy Angular 2 course and it's pretty loving cool, only in as far as (EventBinding) and [PropertyBinding] but as I get into it all I can think is that JavaScript has lost the run of itself and wandered off to a strange place where it's developing wild notions. Just remember that you are learning Angular, not javascript.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Just remember that you are learning Angular, not javascript. Would it not be more accurate to say Typescript? Also yeah it does almost feel like Angular 2 is almost its own language. Ape Fist fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Jan 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:Would it not be more accurate to say Typescript? Also I Typescript is it's own thing, so you are learning that as well, but one of the things I prefer about React / Redux vs. Angular is that much of the effort involved in learning Angular is lost if you stop using it. React / Redux has such a small footprint (because it's "not a framework" and leaves you to figure out all the stuff Angular does for you) that you learn javascript really well when you use it. Obviously my opinion, and Angular isn't a "bad" thing to learn, but it's sort of like being a jQuery whiz... remove the library, and what can you still do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
As a complete react noob am I correct that using bootstrap components requires the installation of a 3rd party package like react-bootstrap? Seems tricky to maintain rather than just hand rolling what you need?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
Thom ZombieForm posted:As a complete react noob am I correct that using bootstrap components requires the installation of a 3rd party package like react-bootstrap? Seems tricky to maintain rather than just hand rolling what you need? I'm a little confused. Are you saying you'd rather maintain your own code than install a third party library? If you need a very small part of Bootstrap, then it probably makes sense to write your own stuff. If you're going to rely on a lot of it, why wouldn't you install it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
huhu posted:I'm a little confused. Are you saying you'd rather maintain your own code than install a third party library? If you need a very small part of Bootstrap, then it probably makes sense to write your own stuff. If you're going to rely on a lot of it, why wouldn't you install it? It really depends on what you are building. If you are building a one off project, maybe using Angular and everything it comes with is appropriate. As the thing you build gets larger and deviates more from the Golden Path that Angular sets out, you will end up maintaining more of your own code, and at that point it becomes debatable how useful a giant framework is if you throw out 90% of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Skandranon posted:It really depends on what you are building. If you are building a one off project, maybe using Angular and everything it comes with is appropriate. As the thing you build gets larger and deviates more from the Golden Path that Angular sets out, you will end up maintaining more of your own code, and at that point it becomes debatable how useful a giant framework is if you throw out 90% of it. Good point. We are currently trying to get rid of a library that nobody will update to React 16 and it's a bit of a pain. But I imagine he's probably building a one off project and I think while learning React it'd be good to lean on libraries before deciding to write your own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
huhu posted:Good point. We are currently trying to get rid of a library that nobody will update to React 16 and it's a bit of a pain. But I imagine he's probably building a one off project and I think while learning React it'd be good to lean on libraries before deciding to write your own. You're right, I was more replying to a few posts at a time. If you are a complete noob, yeah just use Bootstrap & Lodash. You can replace them later if/when it actually matters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Typescript is it's own thing, so you are learning that as well, but one of the things I prefer about React / Redux vs. Angular is that much of the effort involved in learning Angular is lost if you stop using it. React / Redux has such a small footprint (because it's "not a framework" and leaves you to figure out all the stuff Angular does for you) that you learn javascript really well when you use it. Obviously my opinion, and Angular isn't a "bad" thing to learn, but it's sort of like being a jQuery whiz... remove the library, and what can you still do? I've fiddled around with some very basic React stuff and yeah it's a little closer to JS I guess than Angular 2 is at this point. But honestly for someone whose still learning about programming from a not-a-pro-but-i-know-how-a-ternary-operator-and-classes-work-i-guess level ultimately it's all just more knowledge to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:I've fiddled around with some very basic React stuff and yeah it's a little closer to JS I guess than Angular 2 is at this point. But honestly for someone whose still learning about programming from a not-a-pro-but-i-know-how-a-ternary-operator-and-classes-work-i-guess level ultimately it's all just more knowledge to me. If you want to add even more alternatives to your list, Vue is a (very) nice compromise between React's pure JS approach and Angular's angular-ish one. I tend to prefer it over both when I can choose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
Yeah I've had a peep at Vue and I know it's gaining popularity because it's not as balls to the wall as Angular 2 and it's a little more Angular-like compared to React. Angular-lite I guess? But my job I'm starting next week requires me to study and become familiar with Angular 2. But I think there's going to be a surge of people adopting Vue to get away from the increasingly (and potentially unnecessarily) complexity of Angular.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:Yeah I've had a peep at Vue and I know it's gaining popularity because it's not as balls to the wall as Angular 2 and it's a little more Angular-like compared to React. Angular-lite I guess? But my job I'm starting next week requires me to study and become familiar with Angular 2. But I think there's going to be a surge of people adopting Vue to get away from the increasingly (and potentially unnecessarily) complexity of Angular. I am certainly in this boat. I think they got some things right in AngularJS but it had too much crap in it. They fixed those things, then floored it with Angular and I don't know if I want to follow them. Vue seems to be maintaining that middle path which I liked, and will certainly be pushing for it at  . Wish me luck fellow goons. Got my protein shakes and hard-boiled eggs all ready to go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 05:49
|
|
|
I used Vue to build my last project and I'm very happy with the result. Vue /w vuex and vue-router. After a year of working with React and Redux, Vue was such a breeze to use, it was delightful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 10:39
|
|
|
As much as I fully understand and actually appreciate the whole thing where you insert this new Angular 2 syntax directly into the HTML template and because it's operating inside of a component it works, i.e. things like ngIf, ngFor, [], and () events I still feel like sitting here going 'You've gone too far this time, google, too far  ' Maybe it's something to do with the idea that I don't like logic bleeding into the HTML the way it does. It's not exactly advanced logic but I dunno, I'm grumbling about absolutely nothing here and there's probably a billion advantages to doing it this way versus something like stuffing a function into the component and calling it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 11:43
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:As much as I fully understand and actually appreciate the whole thing where you insert this new Angular 2 syntax directly into the HTML template and because it's operating inside of a component it works, i.e. things like ngIf, ngFor, [], and () events I still feel like sitting here going 'You've gone too far this time, google, too far If there is, i'd love to hear it. Javascript already has if blocks and for loops so I've never really understood why all that new syntax was necessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:As much as I fully understand and actually appreciate the whole thing where you insert this new Angular 2 syntax directly into the HTML template and because it's operating inside of a component it works, i.e. things like ngIf, ngFor, [], and () events I still feel like sitting here going 'You've gone too far this time, google, too far I started thinking of it as: template logic should be in the template. That seems to have left me in the correct headspace for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 15:36
|
|
|
IMO if you’re doing anything more complicated than conditionals and iteration in template logic you’re probably doing something wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:IMO if you’re doing anything more complicated than conditionals and iteration in template logic you’re probably doing something wrong. I think that's all the logic Angular and Vue let you do in their templates anyway. React is more permissive about it since you use javascript directly but I'd expect someone using it would know better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
gmq posted:I think that's all the logic Angular and Vue let you do in their templates anyway. React is more permissive about it since you use javascript directly but I'd expect someone using it would know better. React is kind of a totally different paradigm and, arguably, the idea of templates doesn't really map well onto how React works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 16:52
|
|
|
I think Angular definitely went off the deep end. AngularJS already had issues with allowing too much logic in the template, and it took awhile to beat it out of people to keep the templates thin. Then Angular shows up with even MORE options for putting logic in the template, AND it's no longer even HTML compliant. Keep in mind Angular is written by the GreenTea team, which is Googles internal CMS. They want a framework that makes doing endless forms easy. They don't care what the larger community wants.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Blindly following Google in practices seems to be a common pastime in the industry anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
The problem in having a point of view about what is and is not too powerful for a template, is that it’s perfectly fine for a static website, yet woefully inadequate for building dynamic components, the core building blocks of a dynamic UI. Turns out it’s real nice to build static websites with components too though, my shop has altogether stopped using templates in favour of React for pretty much everything except email, and the reason is pretty straightforward: Building isolated, dependable components with a good API is the goal of a component based view layer like React. Neutering the language used in these components makes them ‘simpler’ at the expense of being able to express clearly the isolated/dependable/good API bit. All it does is drive the complexity deeper into directives (if we’re thinking about angular) or surfaces the complexity to the user of the component. So, your goal of keeping things simple actually gets compromised because now the components can’t be isolated properly, or have lovely APIs, and the template writing designer STILL needs a programmer to help them, nullifying the original goal of having a stripped down template language. As it stands, I think components with the full flexibility of a proper programming language is a far better default to work from when building UIs, as compared to the original normal of templates being the default for rendering static site. God knows they don’t write UI toolkits for native OSes in a ‘neutered language’, they write them in a complete language and expose a proper API, or at least that’s the goal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
Wait is TypeScript the neutered language here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:
I'm not sure what you're getting at with this? Those API:s are hard to work with, which is why most UI toolkit exposes a template engine, like Android layout, iOS Nib, WPF XAML and Qt Qml. You always have a backdoor if you need to code a close to the metal component, so I don't see what coding components in javascript instead of templates buys you in day-to-day usage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 11:33 |
|
|
Although to be fair how far away from the Chip is something like Angular 2 though. It's built on top of TS, which is on top of JS, running in a client-side engine like V8 which I think is Java which is on top of (I think) Assembly on top of all the 1s and 0s. So that's like 4 layers of abstraction and I'm probably wrong about that. Edit: V8 is compiled in C++ and then compiled down to machine so that shows what I know. Ape Fist fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Jan 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 23:55
|
|