That is helpful info. Thanks Mark. Syntactic sugar in some cases should be good. The arrow notation might make the language look more cryptic at first glance for those coming from some language families, but I know it would be helpful.
The idea of typescript is likely more problematic than the language itself. I'm thinking of colleagues who have avoided C# and Java because of the strong typing. Just the thought of taking a very usable language that is easy to teach and adding conceptual complexity and more ways of doing the same things is disturbing. I just noticed the subject says EC5 instead of ES5. Sheesh. I would like to call it "JavaScript" and abbrev it as "JS" and stick with JS for the next few decades, adopting new versions as the containers it runs in handle such. I am happy to stick with that and upgrade as the browser does, recognizing that is a slow process. However, I also want to use a language that will have a lot of educational materials, videos, examples etc with Angular. If angular 2 is throwing out controllers, directives, scope, respect for the importance of backward compatibility AND JavaScript, that would be going way too far. Smiles. --dawn Sent from my iPad > On Jul 22, 2015, at 6:16 AM, Mark Volkmann <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dawn, > > There are no limitations in ES5. Everything you can do in ES6 can also be > done in ES5. The code just looks different. Many things are more concise in > ES6. After using ES6 for the past eight months, it's now painful to look at > ES5 code. The thing that stands out the most for me is arrow functions, but I > also use many of the other features. > > I believe AtScript has been abandoned in favor of TypeScript. > Opinions vary, but I think Dart will fade away soon. > TypeScript looks promising to me. I like the gradual typing. > > --- > R. Mark Volkmann > Object Computing, Inc. > >> On Jul 21, 2015, at 1:29 PM, Dawn Wolthuis <dawnwolth...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> What are the limitations of ES5 that are the most troubling to you when >> writing Angular apps? >> >> As I mentioned, I like transpilers better than "code generators" of a >> different ilk, but the new language has to give us enough to make it >> worthwhile to be writing in one language and debugging in another. At this >> point, I'm likely doing simple things, but I am not hitting the limits of >> the language. There are a few nice things with ES6, no doubt (I watched a >> Crockford video on it earlier this year after being concerned when seeing >> class declarations in the code). >> >> Also, what should we pick - typescript, atscript, dart, es6, >> es6-just-the-good-parts (it will be interesting to see jslint/jshint with >> es6 -- it is likely at least an option to have it bark if you use a class >> declaration). Ecmascript 5 is working for my purposes today, but it will be >> good to get enhancements too at some point, no doubt. I just haven't hit >> that wall yet, so I'm curious where you have hit it. What have you >> encountered that will we need to do for typical business data processing >> that is really difficult or error-prone in ES5 (Crockford does give some >> examples). --dawn >> >> >>> On Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 11:39:11 AM UTC-5, Mark Volkmann wrote: >>> I know this is getting a little off topic, but I think we need to accept >>> that transpilers are here to stay. With the move to annual updates to the >>> ECMAScript spec, browsers will always be chasing the standard. If we want >>> to wait until all the browsers we need to support in our web apps have >>> support for a feature we want to use, it will be a long wait. I'm not >>> willing to wait to be able to write more concise code. >>> >>> There are all kinds of things that need to be automated in a client-side >>> build process like running JSHint, running LESS, and running a transpiler. >>> I have been doing this for a production app for seven months now. It is not >>> painful at all and it is quite fast. >>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Dawn Wolthuis <dawnwo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Thanks Mark. It might make sense at some point to configure the most >>>> popular Angular 2.x development environment, whatever that might be, even >>>> if it includes an ES6 transpiler. We could then use standards, such as >>>> favoring functions over classes in most cases, to keep the added >>>> complexity of the extended language from making the software more >>>> difficult to develop and maintain. --dawn >>>> >>>>> On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 5:29:16 PM UTC-5, Mark Volkmann wrote: >>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that ES6 is not an all or nothing >>>>> proposition. You can start using an ES6 transpiler without changing any >>>>> of the existing ES5 code. Then as existing files are modified, maybe for >>>>> bug fixes or to add new features, you can start inserting use of ES6 >>>>> features gradually. The benefit is that by the time you are able to use >>>>> Angular 2 you will already be comfortable with many ES6 features. >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Dawn Wolthuis <dawnwo...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Thanks Mark, but the response here is disappointing. There has been a >>>>>> significant investment in learning ES5 with Angular 1.x, and it does not >>>>>> sound wise to do a move to ES6 so that it can transpiled back to ES5, >>>>>> when all existing code at this organization is written in a non-OO >>>>>> language. They are about to launch into a rewrite of an app written some >>>>>> time ago, so if it would be a really bad idea to write any app in >>>>>> JavaScript now, without first writing OO stuff to be transpiled back to >>>>>> ES5, then I would not be surprised if that were the last straw in their >>>>>> decision to go the Angular route. This was a very discouraging response, >>>>>> as you might imagine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there some good options out there for ES5 frameworks that are likely >>>>>> to continue into the future? Please advise. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks. --dawn >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 3:18:17 PM UTC-5, Mark Volkmann wrote: >>>>>>> I recommend starting to use ES6 now with Angular 1. You can use Traceur >>>>>>> or Babel, both excellent transpilers. Automate their use with gulp or >>>>>>> Grunt. Both can watch for code changes made by any editor/IDE, >>>>>>> transpile on the fly, and reload the web browser where the app is >>>>>>> running. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think the learning curve is very steep for the basics. Start >>>>>>> with arrow functions. Add in things like destructuing, default >>>>>>> parameter values, and enhanced object literals. Then learn about new >>>>>>> new class keyword. You'll be in much better shape by the time Angular2 >>>>>>> is ready for production use. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Dawn Wolthuis <dawnwo...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> I would like some help understanding where ES6 fits in the Angular 2.0 >>>>>>>> picture. It is not yet "perfectly clear" to me whether folks who will >>>>>>>> are learning Angular 1.4 today with ES5 will be compelled to learn ES6 >>>>>>>> in order to transition to Angular 2.0. I have heard (here, I think) >>>>>>>> that it is not required, but I have also seen no evidence that there >>>>>>>> will be a lot of ES5 materials for those doing Angular 2.0 with ES5 in >>>>>>>> the future. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Given that some folks moving to Angular 1.x today are highly >>>>>>>> proficient in other non-OO programming languages but have little to no >>>>>>>> OO experience, I would prefer that they could learn ES5 and keep going >>>>>>>> with that in a transition to Angular 2.0. I would definitely prefer >>>>>>>> that I could at least tell them this is likely a wise scenario. >>>>>>>> ng-1.x/ES5 -> ng-2.0/ES5 -> (someday maybe) ng-m.x/ES6. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am hopeful that we can decouple Angular 2.0 training and migration >>>>>>>> (in the future) from ES6 training and migration -- preferring to put >>>>>>>> off the latter indefinitely or at least until it can be expected to >>>>>>>> run in the browser. However, we do want the wealth of training >>>>>>>> materials available in videos etc from the web for our Angular 2.0 >>>>>>>> training. We would like to use commonly accepted approaches for this >>>>>>>> development. At this point, it seems that most (all?) examples have >>>>>>>> the two tied together -- the developer must leap from Angular 1 to >>>>>>>> Angular 2 while also jumping through OO hoops to adopt OO patterns >>>>>>>> (for no highly apparent reason -- perhaps it is the notion that after >>>>>>>> a half-century of developers writing applications without OO, it is >>>>>>>> now essential in any language or else that throwing everything into >>>>>>>> one language is better than keeping it simple?). [I might not really >>>>>>>> be a snarky person outside of my Angular 2.0 distrust, smiles.] With a >>>>>>>> few exceptions, as someone else here mentioned, ES6 solves a problem >>>>>>>> that does not currently trouble us. It introduces a problem that does >>>>>>>> -- lack of OO experience by some, not all, LOB developers. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please help me understand whether it will be wise to couple Angular >>>>>>>> 2.0 with ES6+transpiler, rather than coding in the same language we >>>>>>>> must debug in within the browser. Obviously, a developer would then >>>>>>>> need to understand both ES6 (for the source) and generated ES5 (which >>>>>>>> will run in the browser). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please clue me in on a) whether ES6 will, for all intents and >>>>>>>> purposes, be required in a move to Angular 2.0 b) whether it will be >>>>>>>> more difficult, perhaps due to lack of materials, for a site to move >>>>>>>> from Angular 1 to 2 without also moving from ES5 to 6 and c) whether >>>>>>>> you think that it would be wise to bite the bullet and do the move >>>>>>>> from Angular 1 to 2 and from ES5 to 6 all at the same time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks. --dawn >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "AngularJS" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>>> an email to angular+u...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to ang...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. >>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> R. Mark Volkmann >>>>>>> Object Computing, Inc. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "AngularJS" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>> an email to angular+u...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to ang...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> R. Mark Volkmann >>>>> Object Computing, Inc. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "AngularJS" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to angular+u...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to ang...@googlegroups.com. >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> R. Mark Volkmann >>> Object Computing, Inc. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "AngularJS" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to angular+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to angular@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google > Groups "AngularJS" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/angular/1OPcw8cxORI/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > angular+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to angular@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AngularJS" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to angular+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to angular@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
