Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | stringyham's commentslogin

That fake bee one was really something else.


I've tried several times and I agree, it's boring to me. But a lot of people use it daily and see real progress.


I see it ranked 5th in OP


Oh, the memories!

LC 475 and Performa 5200 here


i'm,using,my,own,rules,deal,with,it


Most of (not all) my results are above the knee skirts.


According to reference.com, “cocktail casual” is not formally defined: “Traditional cocktail attire usually consists of knee length dresses for women, dark suits with a tie for men and fancy shoes for both. Cocktail casual, however, [...] has not yet been concretely defined. It means different things to different people, so partygoers who know the host well should feel free to ask for more specific instructions.”

Knee-length dresses (i.e. “short dresses”) seem to reasonably fall under the definition of “cocktail casual”. For example: https://www.clbxg.com/Cocktail-Casual/


If you can write the app you need with "modules, web components, promises, and async/await" then you never needed Angular to begin with. And that's a good thing, frameworks/libraries are never the answer to everything and are a decision to be weighed carefully.


Agreed. I think the increased support for modules and web components across major browsers in the past year has really given me the confidence that I can go without Angular/React/Vue and still have a well organized project. I still really miss the binding and routing of Angular. But, that is a small compromise.


Are you suggesting that angular apps written in 2014 would not still be working?


I don't think so, the point is that Angular breaks user code often, whereas React rarely does.

An Angular 2+ app built in 2016 (when Angular 2 came out) wouldn't build anymore.

An Angular 1 app didn't even need a build step, so that would probably still work fine.


lol it would work fine. I've had a joke app running Angular 2.0 in production for years. The code doesn't just expire and break. If you upgrade to Angular 8 in your package.json without running the upgrade schematics, yes it will break...because there were breaking changes.

In 2016 React was on version 14. Are you telling me that from version 14 to 16.12 React has had ZERO breaking changes? Because they definitely haven't. That ecosystem has also changed recommended patterns countless times. They just choose to leave a lot of the old implementation options around if they can while Angular as a frameworks tends to be more opinionated.

Same goes for any library or framework across major versions...


> I've had a joke app running Angular 2.0 in production for years. The code doesn't just expire and break.

Nobody claimed that stuff which has been built and never touched again stops working.

> In 2016 React was on version 14. Are you telling me that from version 14 to 16.12 React has had ZERO breaking changes?

No, I'm not saying that. If they had zero breaking changes, I would have said exactly that, it would be remarkable.

Nevertheless, there have been very few breaking changes in that timeframe[1] and they are highly unlikely to affect if you're doing ordinary stuff.

[1] https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md

> Because they definitely haven't. That ecosystem has also changed recommended patterns countless times.

You can just ignore the "ecosystem". You don't need it. React pretty much only does one thing. It doesn't impose an architecture on you. If you want to go all-in on the ecosystem, maybe it's as bad or worse than Angular. That's besides my point.

> Same goes for any library or framework across major versions...

No it doesn't. Some or even most people working with Javascript are completely out of touch with software engineering practices outside of the web bubble. Breaking changes are supposed to be avoided at great cost. Of course there's no real incentive for that if you're a random person pushing something to npm, or if you're Google and your business model is selling users instead of software.


> extremely bad french, so it is pretty much only used by ignorant journalists

I wouldn't say that, it's still debated whether it's correct or not.


I kept having sync problems with OneNote so I had to ditch it and started using evernote instead.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: