News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

btford

Re:Revisit.link – simple glitch services on Monday August 25, 2014 @07:22PM (#8224808)
you ruined glitches
Re:AngularJS 1.2.0: timely-delivery on Friday November 08, 2013 @10:15PM (#6700516)
> why didnt you think about having this feature optional?

Opt-in security features aren't very useful.

> class based controllers are optional yet,because of them you introduce a feature that affect function based controllers ?

That's how competing constraints work out sometimes.

We're always looking to improve though. The code is open source, so feel free to submit a PR or fork it if you disagree. :)

Re:AngularJS 1.2.0: timely-delivery on Friday November 08, 2013 @08:21PM (#6700240)
> shoved at the latest minute

The pull request was opened 3 weeks ago with plenty of discussion.

Re:AngularJS 1.2.0: timely-delivery on Friday November 08, 2013 @07:16PM (#6699997)
We've been steadily working on improving the docs, and rolling out significantly improvements on a regular basis. Is there any particular part of the docs that still ails you?
Re:Angular Announces AngularDart on Tuesday November 05, 2013 @07:32PM (#6679668)
Please show me this 3 month break AngularJS took in the Github activity log: https://github.com/angular/angular.js/pulse
Re:Angular Announces AngularDart on Tuesday November 05, 2013 @06:55PM (#6679455)
> the development of important features stalled for AngularJS as the team was busy working on Dart version.

Not true. Google grew the team. Take a look at the activity on Github. The velocity has been consistently high throughout the development of the Dart fork: https://github.com/angular/angular.js/pulse

If there was some important feature you wanted, you are always able to submit a PR yourself. That's how open source works.

Re:Angular Announces AngularDart on Tuesday November 05, 2013 @05:08PM (#6678774)
False dichotomy. Work on the the JavaScript version has actually increased. Google grew the team, not split it. https://github.com/angular/angular.js/pulse
Re:JavaScript is not suitable for large web apps on Thursday June 14, 2012 @06:05PM (#4113771)
Did they lint or unit test their code? Without having a way to verify that parts of your app work at a smaller level, of course it's going to get hairy when it starts to grow. Although a compile step verifies types, unit tests do that plus check against runtime errors. This is not a language problem.