When and when not to use AngularJS

[Olivier Clément]

Hi,

I'm currently writing a bit of overview/documentation about Angular for internal use at the office, and would need some bullet points about when it makes the most sense to use AngualrJS and when it doesn't...

Beside the obvious "use for medium to big web-app and not for smaller websites", what would you guys seem is appropriate for this topic?

Thanks in advance

[Witold Szczerba]

Why only for medium to big and not for smaller websites?
I would recommend Angular.js for each and every application. Websites
need some kind of CMS and server-side rendering.

> --
> 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?hl=en-US.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Olivier Clément]

Well I do agree with that in a sense; At the same time I would be tempted to think it's an overkill solution for site that could be just fine with static pages and maybe some jQuery. These don't really need the separation of concerns or the modularity provided by Angular really...

On the other hand, it can't really hurt I guess.

But yeah, at the moment I feel like there's no use-case where one would say "you shouldn't use Angular for that because..."; but I feel that a framework that's good in all situations cannot really exist in this world. So I'm trying to figure out in which situations angular wouldn't really be a fit

[Andy Joslin]

http://andybam.com doesn't need angular :-p

[ganaraj p r]

For smaller websites just use Angular, take out jquery totally ( when jquery is not an overkill for small website.. angular surely shouldnt be! ).

For medium websites, try your best not to include jquery, you should be able to work with Angular for most medium websites.

For extremely large websites, include jquery or other libraries as and when the need arises. 

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Andy Joslin <andyt...@gmail.com> wrote:

http://andybam.com doesn't need angular :-p

--

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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Regards,
Ganaraj P R

[Tony Polinelli]

Id be thinking that the main reason to use/not use angular would be:

- for the level of interactivity centric features vs. data centric. Eg. a game is not good to build in angular. 

- where SEO is required, angular currently doesnt fit too well - there are people talking of different ways around this, but maybe its more trouble than its worth. 

- where 100% performance is required. Im thinking of a video i saw about how Net Flix is developed in html5. The level of optimization that those guys go to, might defeat the purpose of using a framework. 

Tony Polinelli
http://touchmypixel.com

[vtali]

- In regards to the game, this would prove otherwise: 

http://bombermine.com/#/

- if SEO is required, but not real time client side interactivity, then yes, angular is not a good fit, however, I'd argue that the set up to get SEO working is a one time cost: 

http://www.yearofmoo.com/2012/11/angularjs-and-seo.html

- "100% performance is required", Netflix does use a javascript framework with html5, here is the article: 

http://functionsource.com/post/netflix-feature

While firmly JavaScript-based, the actual presentation of the cards isn’t particularly tied to HTML/CSS and could be readily adapted to other presentation layers–though this potential for generalization isn’t something that Netflix has explored up to now.

Sounds like Angular's methodology. 

I'd venture to say when you're serving static content (is that being done even, aside files) that a client side framework in place early on will save a lot of time adding features and interactivity now becoming a standard.

vtali

[Olivier Clément]

Thanks for all your answers

[Evan Zamir]

This is not obvious to me. I have a "smaller website" (http://nbawowy.com) and am using AngularJS and love it. Without Angular, I'm not even sure I could have done it, as I'm not a full-time programmer, and I don't have any jQuery experience prior to this.

-evan

[Owen M]

This sounds like it could be of use to new angular developers as a whole. Any change you could make the document public?

[Jason Aunkst]

It's always good to use angular. Take the prospective of future work without re-stacking. Angular will take u all the way. I use project generators to bootstrap a project up for angular. It's the separation of concerns of the server and client that's important.