[asciihacker]

Angular is difficult to grok because it makes computer programming second class and limited to what you can cram into HTML tags.

Angular isnt really a Google product - Misko Hevery and another guy (both Google SW Engineers) developed in their free time.

Dart is a Google product and I would say is much easier to grok than Angular.

[throwanem]

> Angular is difficult to grok because it makes computer programming second class and limited to what you can cram into HTML tags.

...say what? I've done a lot of work with Angular, and a lot of work without it, and it's possible that I might agree with what you're saying here if I understood it, but I don't. Can you elaborate?

[asciihacker]

I'm just saying that everything that Angular makes convenient via the hints it throws in HTML is handled behind the scenes by calling Javascript libraries.

I would much rather the QooxDoo approach of writing apps in pure Javascript and using Javascript libraries instead of the HTML/JS/CSS soup that Angular tries to serve up to me as convenience.

It might be more convenient for someone who cant write computer programs. But for me it insults my ability to read, extend and use well-documented APIs.

[throwanem]

> I'm just saying that everything that Angular makes convenient via the hints it throws in HTML is handled behind the scenes by calling Javascript libraries.

Well, of course, but I'm not sure why this would be an issue. Earlier, less well implemented versions of Angular sometimes produced headaches this way. Current versions really don't. Considering the amount of boilerplate I find this saves me having to write and maintain - thus freeing me to spend effort on those parts of my application which are essentially complex, not just accidentally so - I find Angular a pretty clear win there.

Of course, maybe I just can't write computer programs, and my now almost two-decade-long professional career doing so is simply a preposterously unlikely fluke. Who knows?