Wednesday, 9 March, 2016 UTC
Summary
Introduction
We all know that the figure and variety of JavaScript frameworks can be amazing at the best of times and it’s amazingly difficult to keep up with business going on. Since I first detected web components with the agreement of true interoperability and flexibility of functionality I’ve been charmed by the prospect of using sets of web components over a monolithic framework such as AngularJS.
So I’ve decided to give it a go. Over the next couple of months, I will be framework a simple single-page web app which grant users to log in to their twitter explanation and easily search videos via twitter. Although very easy (and not very useful!) this should be suitable to cover the most condition of typical single-page app evolution for comparison.
While opening this process I’ve begun think about the asset and downfalls of such large frameworks and the contradictory web components plus pick and mix a mixture of libraries.
Frameworks
Are our old friends over to stay? Or has not only many frameworks themselves come and gone over the years is it not a time for the approach itself to vanish?
The Good
Add the framework you use is beloved, using it is like having a team of professional at your disposal. Framework code has been proved and tested in ways that a single group just cannot make possible. Framework code has been used in millions of disparate scenarios on thousands of different floor and commonly has been written by business experts.
A novel JavaScript framework typically afford an API to handle the following high-level condition of single-page application development:
- Routing & Templates — Linking complex URL structures to views and/or states
- Services — Componentizing API interaction via HTTP or Sockets
- Dependencies — The skill to keep track of code assurance and make reuse easier
- Helpers — Simple functions to make common tasks with JavaScript easier (.e.g forEach)
The Bad
The downside to using a monolithic framework is that you essentially stick all your eggs in one basket. As your function grow you’re ever more relying on said framework and you will be tight waiting for the architect to add new features to bring the structure in line with newer technology.
As we have noticed in the past time and time over these frameworks come and go and it’s crucial to nearly absurd to migrate from an old dog to the current and greatest. Some newer frameworks such as Aurelia promise to be interchangeable but how well will this task in practice?
Micro-libraries
We’ve used JavaScript libraries for years, is pick and mix really such a great idea?
The Good
The obviously interest and selling point of such study that tackles these four main points we reveal about is that they can calmly be swapped out.
Overall it regularly be easier to react to development on the web and keep your application cutting peak for longer. It will also be accessible to write code that is fairer to be usable crosswise different projects — because you’re not tied to a specific technology.
The Bad
As I quoted earlier I’ve been in camp AngularJS for a very long time and have had a little event to experience building enterprise-ready single-page apps with these micro-libraries; so the stop I make here are what I assume to find as I move on with construction my twitter video app.
With some exceptions, it is rare that many micro-libraries will have had as much disclosure as large frameworks and even less so when you assume about different consolidation of libraries.
Conclusion
Overall I await that certain micro-libraries will gloss through and a center grows around them such as appear with the MEAN stack.
My main ambition for this article is to assemble other people’s insight into these topics. Have you already depress aside large frameworks for the smaller, interchangeable micro-libraries?
See more:
Learn animation using CSS3, Javascript, and HTML5
Best JavaScript Resources to add Voice Control
The post JavaScript Developers really need frameworks appeared first on I'm Programmer.