Why I was Wrong to be Afraid of Angular.js, Part 2

I agree with just about everything in the post, but:<p>&gt; I think the fact that the Angular community has made real progress towards divorcing themselves from jQuery is one of the most encouraging signs for their future. The design of Angular is just different enough, and it is just compelling enough, that it has convinced a whole range of developers to build a new generation of libraries that I suspect are more likely to be suited to whatever the next iteration of the web as a platform will look like.<p>This part bothered me a bit. The article doesn&#x27;t make the case for why jQuery needs replacing or why all that duplicate effort is a good thing. Don&#x27;t get me wrong: I&#x27;m not married to jQuery and I&#x27;m open to the idea of there being a better way.<p>I just don&#x27;t find the idea that we have to move away from jQuery that self-evident.

We&#x27;ve been doing well encapsulated, tricky back end stuff for a while. Started with angular over the last month. Angular basically achieves the same proper separation of concerns that our perl-based back end tools do.<p>Angular is not really interesting because it&#x27;s the new big thing. It&#x27;s really interesting because it&#x27;s right. (bitch of a learning curve though).

This is part 2 of this discussion : <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7384937" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=7384937</a>

You don&#x27;t need to worry about dependency injection breaking when your code is minified. You can supply a list of the dependencies as strings, and minified code will work fine:<p><pre><code> angular.module(&quot;whatever&quot;).controller(&quot;YourController&quot;, [&quot;dep1&quot;, &quot;dep2&quot;, function (dep1, dep2) { whatever... }]); </code></pre> Even though the `dep1` and `dep2` params get minified, angular will still pass in the correct dependencies.

I love it but it&#x27;s sometimes not as smart as it thinks it is. For instance they removed ng-bind-html-unsafe (because &quot;safety&quot;! Thanks Ralph Nader!) and now you have to jump through all kinds hoops to add a simple ng-click to a dynamically generated element.<p>That&#x27;s something that can be done in 30 seconds with jQuery but my determination in making it work the &#x27;Angular Way&#x27; has turned it into a 48 hour Donald Duck cartoon.

Angular seems not to have much of actual models (not view models), it&#x27;s all about the view components and syncing them with their view models. Backbone doesn&#x27;t have much support for the views, it&#x27;s all about models and collections and syncing them to the server.<p>Yet people don&#x27;t seem to be too eager to use both together. Why do you think that is?

I find the architecture of ng fits a vast number of projects I work on very elegantly, however, I feel like I am learning to walk all over again.Things I could do in a day take me a week to learn, but I feel like my learning is progressing fast enough that I will be skilled at its use in a week.

Am I the only one who can&#x27;t stand Angular simply because of its naming?