Google AngularJS Framework - Worth the risk?

Question

I have been asked to build a small web application for one of our clients and think it might be a good opportunity to try out a different framework for building web applicat

Answer 1

+1 @psycho's answer

AngularJS is client-side framework, so you can use any language on the server. It's designed to work well together with jQuery, with big emphasis on testing...

Here are some resources you might find useful:

• TUTORIAL: http://docs.angularjs.org/#!/tutorial
• API DOCS: http://docs.angularjs.org/#!/api
• Developer Guide: http://docs.angularjs.org/#!/guide

Some example apps:

• http://cburgdorf.github.com/angular-todo-app
• http://www.fluid.ie/angular/calculate/
• http://hookercookerman.github.com/angularjs-todos/
• http://paul-hammant.github.com/StoryNavigator/navigator.html

Adapter for SenchaTouch: https://github.com/tigbro/sencha-touch-angular-adapter

Adapter for jQ Mobile: https://github.com/tigbro/jquery-mobile-angular-adapter

Feel free to ask any question on mailing list !

We are still in beta, but there are already several internal apps at Google, powered by AngularJS.

---

UPDATE (26th July 2012):

AngularJS v1.0 has been released.

For some public AngularJS-powered apps, check out http://builtwith.angularjs.org

Answer 2

I would say yes to this and check out John Papa's hottowel implementation as a way to do it.

Answer 3

We have been developing a port of a Swing fat-client application in AngularJS for the last couple of months and I think it is worth recommending. As far as learning resources go, check out the official project site (and be sure to read the tutorial) and the mailing list (the authors are very helpful).

The good stuff:

• great testability
• the two-way data binding is a very powerful feature, and it can be extremely helpful once you "get it"
• IMO the AngularJS templates are much less brittle than using data- attributes or "special" CSS classes to mark elements that do something
• it greatly reduces the need for using jquery plugins, because implementing that functionality in AngularJS is very easy (stuff like trees, tabs, accordions, etc.)

The bad stuff:

• the learning curve seems pretty steep (I didn't have much of a problem, but I've seen some people struggle with it)
• validations in AngularJS suck for the time being (a new implementation is on the way)
• not all libraries/jquery plugins play nicely with Angular and usually you have to wrap them
• the API is still being polished, so expect breaking changes (not a big problem with frequent releases and very good changelog, though)
• performance is OK up until several thousand bindings on a page - most of the time this is not a limitation, but there are cases when this could be a problem.

Some pointers (if you ever decide to learn AngularJS):

• some people really overuse widgets. In my experience, it's much better to use HTML "partials" + services, and only use widgets sporadically.
• read source code of the library - it's the best place to learn stuff about angular
• no DOM manipulation in services/controllers
• if you use css classes to bind to events, you are doing it wrong

Answer 4

I remember reading this SO thread couple of months back with same question in my mind, and we decided to go ahead with AngularJS, and the best decision we made on this project yet.

We are using AngularJS + ASP.NET MVC4 REST WebAPI.

Most probalbly after such a nice client side Javascript MVC framework, you would only need REST API layer interacting with Business Logic Layer at server side, and no MVC at server Side (ASP.NET MVC/Spring/Structs would feel like old memories).

You will find Angular-UI good add-on (esp ng-grid)

Soon after our project finishes, we might put some of our directive we wrote for open source world.

Answer 5

I have been researching the merits of AngularJS for many months to utilize as a core framework for product I am creating. There are many aspects of AJS that make it worth while to learn. Yes there is a bit of a learning curve but its well worth it, especially if you wish to have more control on client side capability.

JQuery manipulates the DOM at run time, whereas AJS situates itself within the JS rendering lifecycle. This allows you to teach the DOM new tricks by creating your HTML Elements and Attributes. This is very, very powerful. As what you are able to do is introduce new Element behaviors for whatever your purpose and need. In AJS these custom HTML Attributes/Elements are called Directives. With the ability to craft your own Directives, you are able to build functionality that the current HTML doesn't have, pushing out capabilities that will run on all modern browsers now and into the future. Of the many approaches to inducing new behavior, AJS appears to be the safest direction one could take due to how they have chosen to implement it.

There is a huge performance gain over JQuery in AJS.

I love the simplicity of the two-way data binding, and the separation of concerns in their client side MVC pattern, which as pointed out above provide great testability. There scope object is the glue between the View (HTML), the Model (your Data) and your custom Controllers. The scope provides access to parent attributes and can be isolated at the sibling level, which is important for some reusable templates.

Templates can created and reused across your application which can contain 0 or more custom directives.

I have been using frameworks such as PRISM and MEF but I am finding that AJS has most of the same features that exist in these .NET frameworks but in a 29K footprint. There is rumors that they are working on lazy-loading which if provided will provide for some very interesting LOB type capabilities.

There are a number of UI frameworks that are being built for AJS but you can wrap any 3rd party control lib as needed, given a bit of effort. The trick is to ensure that when these 3rd party controls have changes induced, that you ensure AJS is properly notified using their apply method.

If you combine AJS with MS TypeScript within VS 2012, it provides the ability to manage and build some very impressive projects which will work well for those who are more comfortable with projects within VS.

There are a ton of other reasons to look at AJS, but if you are considering frameworks such as KnockOut I'd highly recommend AJS instead, regardless of it's perceived learning curve. Knockout is a library, AJS is a framework.

Answer 6

IMHO developing something for a client which they may have difficulty supporting is unprofessional. You have to bear in mind that it will be difficult for your client to hire experienced Angular professionals, or train their own people to climb that "steep learning curve". Also, so far the documentation is not that great. Can you easily, in a few moments, answer the question, "How can I connect my shiny Angular app to my client's database?" Can your client sometime in the future easily grab some existing code and adapt it to their potential future needs? Be honest.

Compare plain old reliable LAMP development to Angular. For a "small web application" I really believe that a professional should give his client something maintainable and simple.

It's not to say that Angular isn't cool and sexy etc etc. But you have your client's future maintainability to think about in addition to the latest framework fad. Tread lightly would be my recommendation. Build your own website with Angular first and see what you think before you bestow your fabulous new skills on some trusting client.