AngularJS 1.2.0: timely-delivery

AngularJS 1.2.0: timely-delivery(blog.angularjs.org)

212 points by jbdeboer 12 years ago | 63 comments

eknkc 12 years ago |

"This commit introduces the notion of "private" properties (properties whose names begin and/or end with an underscore) on the scope chain. These properties will not be available to Angular expressions."

I wish they'd discuss stuff like this and I wish that MongoDB did not store primary keys on _id field.

I blame myself though.

jbdeboer 12 years ago | |

This change was discussed: https://github.com/angular/angular.js/pull/4509

It is also clear from the discussion that there are dissenting opinions -- we are constantly iterating and welcome issues and pull requests to make features work even better. The best way to influence AngularJS is to send a pull request.

eknkc 12 years ago | | |

You are right it was. But most people do not track all issues of all projects they depend on. While I'd love to do that, there's simply not much time.

I belive this should have been in an earlier RC or Beta. This way, more people would have tested ot, ir got a chance to read changelog (I follow the blog and check each beta release). If that window was missed, it should have gone for the next major release.

What I see is that Google announced AngularDart (http://news.dartlang.org/2013/11/angular-announces-angularda...). Dart has _ prefix for private fields. Then AngularJS team goes ahead and forces the same on the JS implementation.

Seems that there is always some political reason to mess with things at Google.

Bahamut 12 years ago | | |

I pay pretty close attention to the issues in the repo, but I apparently missed this. I am also a regular in #angularjs, and never seen it discussed there either, so while the discussion was public, I think it caught almost everyone by surprise.

binofbread 12 years ago | |

I'm running into a similar issue and fairly new to angular. In fact, the tutorial I followed even set up the server calls to use the _id field when looking at a specific model (ie leagues/{{ league._id }} ). What's the proper way to go about fixing this?

psgibbs 12 years ago | | |

You can always create functions that refer to the private element:

MyObject.prototype.id = function(){return this._id;};

Which gives you: leagues/{{ league.id() }}

1qaz2wsx3edc 12 years ago | | |

Don't use 1.2.0 until it's reverted or write a getter.

EugeneOZ 12 years ago | |

Never send DB output directly to frontend, send object, filled by only necessary values from DB output. Otherwise you'll meet security issues and these "_" prefixes will be smalles part of your problems.

Kiro 12 years ago | | |

And how are you supposed to do that using Mongolab, MongoHQ or Firebase?

eknkc 12 years ago | | |

I do that. It's not about sending them directly. It's the underlying field name. I just keep _id fields as _id fields when I prepare data for output.

jayhuang 12 years ago |

I'm really impressed with Angular.

I've previously worked with Backbone.js, and found that many things in Backbone where I've had to manually develop are readily available in Angular.

Moving from Backbone to Angular has made the code much cleaner, and smaller in size. Whereas in Backbone, the code slowly became a mess with all the event listening and event triggering (probably my fault), in Angular, that has all been abstracted for the most part.

Great work guys!

adamors 12 years ago | |

I'm really impressed as well, especially how helpful and outreaching the developers/contributors are on sites like StackOverflow.

Now if the documentation would improve in some of the grayer areas, I would be really happy. Wish I knew enough to contribute.

btford 12 years ago | | |

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?

ollysb 12 years ago |

I've done one project with ember and was very happy with it but I'm now working on a project where I only need parts of the page to be controlled by the framework. So far I'm loving the way angular integrates with the dom but once you get back to the controllers/directives it suddenly feels like I have to do a whole lot more work than with ember. The main difference seems to be that you have to manage updates yourself i.e. use $watch or trigger them yourself by binding to js event. At this point I'm kind of wishing their was an embular project ( :) ) that integrated with the dom the way angular does but had ember's awesome binding/computed properties...

wldlyinaccurate 12 years ago | |

Can you give an example of where you've had to use $watch? Usually too many $watch is an indication that you could improve your app's architecture, e.g. by abstracting into directives.

FWIW I'm only speaking from personal experience and in your case lots of $watch might be necessary.

ollysb 12 years ago | | |

A good example is where I have a list of items which is filtered by a select[1]. I have the select wired up to the controller with a two-way binding and the controller watches for changes to the binding and filters the list accordingly. Maybe this isn't an idiomatic way to do it?

[1] http://plnkr.co/edit/ykfblPHlwkBJyMeObFyV?p=preview

gcv 12 years ago | |

I haven't had to use $watch except to integrate with jQuery plugins for fancy widgets (and wish I could get rid of those). For everything else, two-way binding in Angular works very well.

thatthatis 12 years ago | |

From my vague understanding, I've heard knockout described as similar to your desired "embular"

ollysb 12 years ago | | |

I've actually just inherited a giant mess of knockoutthat i was looking to replace with angular. I have to admit that I was actually expecting angular to handle this kind of stuff so I'm a little disappointed in that respect. Angular does seem to have plenty of benefits but I thin i'll give knockout a full review before(maybe it just needs to be structured better).

mathrawka 12 years ago |

With Javascript disabled the page is completely blank.

edit (bringing text from comment up a level):

If you are building apps for people other than yourself, then having a banner to notify them it won't work is better than a blank page.

A typical banner that I make includes the following things:

- Positioned at the top via CSS and sticks there

- Includes a link to http://www.enable-javascript.com

- Includes a tracking image so I can see how many people are coming without JS enabled

If you have a white page like this blog does, people will think your site is broken and bounce... and may never come back.

treeface 12 years ago | |

Not sure what you were expecting. AngularJS apps aren't usually built with a noJS fallback in mind.

mathrawka 12 years ago | | |

If you are building apps for people other than yourself, then having a banner to notify them it won't work is better than a blank page.

A typical banner that I make includes the following things:

- Positioned at the top via CSS and sticks there

- Includes a link to http://www.enable-javascript.com

- Includes a tracking image so I can see how many people are coming without JS enabled

If you have a white page like this blog does, people will think your site is broken and bounce... and may never come back.

e12e 12 years ago | | |

Well, from the url:

http://blog.angularjs.org/2013/11/angularjs-120-timely-deliv...

I was expecting a) a blog post, and b) from the .html-ending a hypertext document, maybe with text and images?

What possible reason could there be for this to be "an app"? It's a blog, it's for reading -- and you already need a reader to access it -- why would you implement a (new) rendering engine?

Ok, I can see an argument for adding comments via javascript and a service, or for posting blog posts and doing admin stuff. But the other reasons (user tracking etc) for having this as "an app" only detracts from the readers experience.

santialbo 12 years ago |

We've been using rc versions in production code too. As they've mentioned many times when they say unstable it doesn't mean that it was likely to break, simply that they are free to change the API if they need too.

Does anyone know what's the rationale behind the separation of ngRoute? It's less than 4KB and less than 2KB when gzipped. I don't think it's worth the "pain" of having to remember to add another source file.

gyozaking 12 years ago | |

Probably because most projects will use uirouter: https://github.com/angular-ui/ui-router

Guillaume86 12 years ago | |

They want to split in lot of optional modules, it's just the beginning. IMO it's a good idea. For your problem, perhaps they should add a custom build/download tool like jQueryUI.

troyk 12 years ago | | |

I think it's a great idea as well. Would like to see jqLite come out as well and be a separate project. Then those using jquery don't pay for jqLite, and even beter, for a quick landing page I'd be inclined to use jqLite naked for a nice tiny footprint.

lennel 12 years ago | |

what is your build process? (angular noob here)but I would assume your dependency resolution takes care of this. (this sounds to me like build vs real issue)

angrycoder 12 years ago |

Great timing. The angular based project I've been working on for the past 6 months just had a soft launch the other day. Being able to tell the powers that be that we are no longer on the unstable branch will ease a few minds.

yesimahuman 12 years ago |

Nice guys! I've been tracking the rc's with Ionic Framework (http://ionicframework.com/) and just updated to the final. I've especially loved ngAnimate and ngTouch which have been really solid.

Bahamut 12 years ago |

I noticed that Angular was likely to release this morning since all the issues for the milestone was finally cleared out - looking forward to moving to 1.2 stable from 1.2 rc2 (we're using rc2 in production code!).

Also looking forward to seeing new Angular features being worked on again!

joshstrange 12 years ago | |

I'm using rc3 in production right now so I'm looking forward to testing this out upgrading.

dan_sim 12 years ago |

I just wrote a yeoman generator to bootstrap a phonegap application with angular 1.2.0 : https://github.com/dsimard/generator-angular-phonegap

dan_sim 12 years ago | |

Here is a video showing how to bootstrap an angular-phonegap application in 6 commands : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXkLu7q4tq4

wnevets 12 years ago |

Great timing, I'm starting the new version of an angular web app. Having a production version of 1.2 on day one is great!

eliot_sykes 12 years ago |

Any advice for upgrading to 1.2 from 1.0.x? Is it worth going via 1.1.x first?

ffrryuu 12 years ago |

Sweet, looks like some major changes to the compilation in this one.

filipedeschamps 12 years ago |

AngularJS is being one of the coolest thing since Node.js

pandeiro 12 years ago | |

In terms of cool it still has a lot of ground to cover to catch horsejs

filipedeschamps 12 years ago | | |

Dude, seriously, what's this? Random horse tips using google voice? I can't even understand those tips lol

hswolff 12 years ago |

So exciting. Great work guys :)

ryankshaw 12 years ago |

is there a road map for future things that want to be added to angular?

jbdeboer 12 years ago | |

Take a look at the pull request queue on Github. We've been focused on 1.2. There are a lot of new features and proposals that we'll pick up now that the release is out the door.