I have serious performance issues when my angularjs 1.0.7 webapp loads for first time all translation files with angular-translate.
The point is we have only one huge translation file for each language. At the moment with more than 3000 translation lines each. So, if you debug the loading times it takes up to 3 or 4 seconds to load.
I have made some tests and noticed if we use small files with a few translations the performance improves.
I have read a bit about angular-translate and I see there is some partial loading feature, that can load one translation file per each view which maybe is a better approach. I have also read about namespaces that maybe improve performance too.
However, I don´t know if this functionality is working with my angularjs 1.0.7 version because I don´t see anything in the angular-translate docs. I would like to confirm which is the latest angular-translate version that is compatible with my angularjs app and check if there is a feature that can fix this problem.
To migrate angularjs is not an option at this moment.
Do you think it´s possible to use partial files with this angular version, or otherwise is there any other approach to improve this performance issue?
Related
I am currently working in AngularJS 1.2 application, it is a medium size application with 25 modules, now I want to upgrade to angular new version. I can't write freshly because it is an old project, I don't know older requirements of this project. Please any one suggest me the best way to achieve it.
Its not that easy to convert a angular-1 project to Angular-2+. You must need a fresh start, because both the framework is totally different. For project requirement/ business logic, you must understand the logic and the code and then write a fresh code in Angular-2+.
You may copy and paste any javascript code from angular-1 to angular-2+. It will work properly.
This page helped me a lot when I upgraded to angular: https://angular.io/guide/upgrade
A very good handbook for upgrading to angular is: https://angular.io/guide/ajs-quick-reference
A good solution would be to use ngUpgrade: run both AngularJS and Angular at the same time. All Angular code is running in the Angular framework, and AngularJS code in the AngularJS framework.
What happens on top of this is that components and services managed by one framework can interoperate with those from the other framework. This happens in three main areas: Dependency injection, the DOM, and change detection.
Some main things to take into consideration when upgrading:
- Get AngularJS and Angular components and services talking to each other during the upgrade
- Replacing controllers
- Replacing $scope and $watch
- convert directives to components
To upgrade from angular 1.4 to Angular 5 is it possible to use ngupgrade and follow incremental approach or it is strictly applicable to use ngupgrade from version 1.5. According to the image the prerequisites mentioned 1.5 is used for ngUpgrade.
There is official upgrade guide:
https://angular.io/guide/upgrade or https://angular.io/guide/upgrade-performance
But as a person who have written a big AngularJS application and now is working on a big Angular project, I recommend to start a new fresh project and step-by-step write a complete new application in the newest Angular. By my experience, switching between both frameworks is really hard and time-consuming.
In Angular things work totally different (better) and the framework itself offers much more than AngularJS.
If you still want to go the upgrade way, do it in 2 steps:
Upgrade to 1.5 (because there must be a reason why it is required)
Upgrade to Angular
Take a look at this article: https://angular.io/guide/upgrade
And you can upgrade or downgrade services and components between two frameworks.
You should know that there are two ways to bootstrap a Hybrid App:
Using UpgradeModule - Bootstraps both the AngularJS (v1) and Angular (v6) frameworks in the Angular zone
Using DowngradeModule - Bootstraps AngularJS outside of the Angular zone and keeps the two change detection systems separate.
I have tried both ways. And I recommend using DowngradeModule - it's better for performance and memory leaks.
If you google angular hybrid you will find a lot of articles and examples on github
Certainly look at https://angular.io/guide/upgrade to start. It's been a while since I've looked at it and it appears to have significant updates, which is nice. The "Preparation" section still reminds me of the joke: "How to be a millionaire and not pay taxes? Step 1: Get a million dollars." One section of preparation is "Using a Module Loader" which tells you why, but you're still on your own to figure out how to go from, say, grunt to webpack. It's beyond the scope of that page, sure, but that feels like big amorphous step to sort out.
I did find a developer, Sam Julien, that put together a guided video "course" which takes an app and walks through converting it. It is at https://www.upgradingangularjs.com and is certainly more comprehensive than any blog post I've seen. I'm not affiliated but it has gotten me started on laying out some of what we need to change.
It's not a trivial undertaking but being able to see the stages laid out ahead of time has made it seem incrementally possible. (Luckily, we are pretty close to the angularjs style guide already, which is another preparation step.) Good luck!
I have 40-60 scripts in my index. most of us angular
I want in production to make them as a 1 script only
is it possible? all the logic will works?
which library is the best for it?
is it good for performance or only for loading performance
You will want to use something like webpack or SystemJS. These will bundle you JS files all into one file and can minify/uglify this code as well.
Doing this will improve the page loading times as there are less requests to load, and minifying will shrink the filesize down. Uglifing is just to make the js harder to interpret for someone trying to look at your code.
The performance of your angular app will not be improved by doing this however.
Something you can do to increase angular performance on production is turning of debug info, like so:
myApp.config(['$compileProvider', function ($compileProvider)
{
$compileProvider.debugInfoEnabled(false);
}]);
According to the angular.js docs, this is good practise in production and should result in a performance boost.
You may also want to look in one time binding, and using a "track by" in any ng-repeats as other ways of improving performance.
EDIT :
The above tips on angular performance all assume you are using angular.js as opposed to the newer Angular 2+
I have watched the latest ng-conf and saw Brad Green says Angular2 now weight 45K, and angular1 is 56K. I try to understand what those number represent, but without success.
I also saw this gist that list Angular1 and 2 frameworks by size. And there are completely different numbers there.
The ng-conf YouTube link (it's in 57:10).
The relevant slide:
I understand well your question ;-) In fact, it's after packaging your application and using tree shaking. The latter is a technique that leverages modules to only keep what is used in the application (apply to third party libraries as well).
I think these two links could help you:
http://blog.mgechev.com/2016/06/26/tree-shaking-angular2-production-build-rollup-javascript/
https://medium.com/#Rich_Harris/tree-shaking-versus-dead-code-elimination-d3765df85c80#.6s0vcyv49
The presentation was about offline template compiler that is currently experimental, that eliminates loading Angular2 parser and compiler into the browser by processing the templates and converting all declarative bindings to JS at compile time.
This allows to reduce the Angular2 package code size that actually needs to be loaded into the browser.
If one requires solutions like demonstrated in How to realize website with hundreds of pages in Angular2 the parser and compiler would be required to be loaded into the browser and lose this size benefit.
I'm working on a project which has the luxury of using ECMA 6 on the latest browsers for a product that will be shipped in 1.5 years. So we thought why not use Web Components now that Angular 2 isn't available (which is going to be ECMA 6). And while we are at it, can we replace Angular altogether without having to go back to stone age?
How to replace Angular?
There's this site called youmightnotneedjquery.com which is basically about how modern browsers actually have most of the stuff that jQuery was traditionally used for. I'm interested to see something like that for Angular.
We mainly use four Angular features. What are my options for replacing them?
Angular Directives --> Web Components
Angular Modules --> ECMA 6 Modules (not exactly the same thing)
Angular Routes --> ???
Angular 2-way databinding --> ???
PS. We don't want to replace Angular with something similar like Backbone or Ember. We want to replace it with standard web technologies but if we have to use small tools to fill the gap, we'll consider it.
I've been researching in the past 3 weeks and turns out many people are thinking about an alternative after Angular took a drastic change path. Fortunately the upcomming W3C Web Components standard actually has all we need and it works right now with polyfills from the Polymer project. So to answer the question:
Angular Directives --> Web Components use the polyfill until all browsers support it.
Angular Modules --> ECMA 6 Modules part of the problem is solved with HTML imports. But you can also use Traceur until the browsers support it.
Angular Routes --> There's a component for that™ use <app-router>.
Angular 2-way databinding --> Polymer adds a "magic" layer on top of the plain standard web components. This includes many features including data-binding.
+Plus More
If you're wondering about the build process for concatenating files in order to reduce the number of HTTP requests, take a look at Addy Osmani's post about Vulcanize. Spoiler: you may not need it with the upcoming HTTP 2 optimizations.
Many Angular projects use Twitter Bootstrap for the layout. Polymer can do that plus it plays nicely with Google's Paper elements (totally optional but superbly awesome).
If you want to make yourself familiar with web components in general, here is a bunch of nice articles: http://webcomponents.org/articles/
And here is a wealth of web components: http://customelements.io/ I don't know if it's going to be a new NPM, but the list components is pretty impressive and growing.
It's relatively complicated to expose an API for an Angular component. People have come up with all sorts of methods from link function to emitting events. In Web Components, however, it's really easy to make your component interact with the world outside and indeed the API and events you expose aren't much different from standard HTML tags like <audio>.
Just like Angular, you can use Polymer with Dart as well.
Conclusion
Overall, I don't see any reason to use Angular except if:
You have a huge source code investment in angular and don't want to port everything to standard web. (Angular 2.0 will deprecate your code anyway, so you're stuck with Angular 1.*)
Your team is too lazy to learn a new technology (in that case web might not be the right platform for this attitude anyway).
Angular was good for what it was doing and had its own Hype cycle. Web components solve many of the issues Angular was trying to address. Probably Angular had a role as a proof of concept for the Web components. But now it's time to move on. Web is reinventing itself everyday and it's inevitable to moves someone's cheese.
I'm not saying that Polymer is the ultimate answer to everything. At best it's another Angular which will render useless in a couple of years, but now it's a good time to learn and use it. The W3C standards don't die easily though, and Polymer tends to be much closer to them.
There's an element for that™ is the new There's an app for that™
TLDR: seriously consider writing an almost Angular 2.0-compatable Angular 1.3 app before rolling your own framework
It seems as if you've identified that Angular does a lot of things the right way and that's why you're attempting to replicate it, so basically you're going to roll your own by combining a hodgepodge of libraries. Unless you have an enormous investment of Engineering hours, the framework you build will likely be:
Lightly documented
A cross-browser maintenance nightmare and (worst of all)
Difficult for new hires to learn
If there wasn't a framework out there that did what you want to do already, I think rolling your own makes sense, but by trying to recreate Angular you're:
Taking on a lot of Engineering work that has already been done by a dedicated team, that could have been spent on building product
Made it MUCH more difficult to onboard new employees because you have to:
Find candidates that are willing to use a home-grown framework instead of growing their skills at an open source framework they could use elsewhere
Train these employees to use your framework (and good luck unless your documentation is mature)
I know your question asks how to replace Angular, but I've seen too many companies go the route of rolling their own and paying for it down the road. Again, if your budget includes a ton of core resources to build out (and document, and maintain) the framework and you don't think there is any chance corners will get cut when push comes to shove later if timelines get tight, then rolling your own might make sense. However, I think you should seriously consider reading up on how to write Angular 1.3 apps so that they're easy to port to Angular 2.0 and go the Angular route. Just look at the size of the community you're missing out on:
http://www.airpair.com/js/javascript-framework-comparison