Angular 2 vs jsf

Overview

Angular

Stacks3.8K

Followers4.8K

Votes499

GitHub Stars99.2K

Forks26.7K

JSF

Stacks138

Followers223

Votes4

Angular 2 vs jsf: What are the differences?

Angular 2 and JSF are both popular frameworks used for web development. While they have some similarities, there are key differences between them that make them unique and suitable for different use cases.

Language: One significant difference between Angular 2 and JSF is the programming language they are based on. Angular 2 is written in TypeScript, which is a superset of JavaScript. On the other hand, JSF is based on Java, a statically-typed programming language. This means that developers working with Angular 2 will be more familiar with client-side JavaScript development, while those working with JSF will have a stronger background in Java.
Component-based Architecture: Angular 2 follows a component-based architecture, where the application is built by composing reusable components. This promotes reusability, modularity, and separation of concerns. In contrast, JSF uses a more traditional server-side rendering approach, where the application is composed of server-side Java classes and HTML templates. This can make it more suitable for traditional enterprise applications that require extensive server-side processing.
Two-way Data Binding: Angular 2 supports two-way data binding, which means that changes in the model can automatically update the view, and changes in the view can update the model. This simplifies the development process and reduces the amount of code needed to synchronize the model and the view. JSF, on the other hand, primarily uses one-way data binding, where changes in the model can update the view, but changes in the view do not automatically update the model. This can make data synchronization more manual and require additional code.
Dependency Injection: Angular 2 relies heavily on dependency injection, which allows for the easy management of object dependencies and promotes the separation of concerns. It provides a built-in dependency injection system that allows developers to control the instantiation and management of objects. JSF also supports dependency injection but relies more on the Java EE standards for dependency injection.
Routing: Angular 2 provides a powerful routing system out of the box, which allows developers to define routes for different URLs and map them to specific components. This makes it easy to create single-page applications with different views and navigation. JSF, on the other hand, does not have built-in routing capabilities and typically relies on a separate library or custom code to handle navigation.
Community and Ecosystem: Angular 2 has a large and active community of developers and a rich ecosystem of libraries, tools, and resources. The large community means that developers have access to a wealth of knowledge, documentation, and support. JSF also has an active community but is generally smaller compared to Angular 2. The ecosystem around JSF is more focused on enterprise applications, with extensive support for Java EE standards.

In Summary, Angular 2 and JSF have key differences in terms of the language they are based on, their architecture, data binding, dependency injection, routing capabilities, and community/ecosystem support. These differences make them suitable for different types of applications and cater to different developer preferences and backgrounds.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Angular, JSF

Dennis

CTO at Prepaid-Hoster

May 17, 2020

Decided

I was first sceptical about using Angular over AngularJS. That's because AngularJS was so easy to integrate in existing websites. But building apps from scratch with Angular is so much easier. Of course, you have to build and boilerplate them first, but after that - you save a ton of time. Also it's very cozy to write code in TypeScript.

181k views181k

Comments

Kyle

Web Application Developer at Fortinet

Oct 16, 2019

Decided

When deciding on a front end framework to build my bitcoin faucet project, I knew I needed something battle hardened, dependedable, but also feature filled and ready to go out of the box.

While I've written some smaller apps with ng2+, I've never gone full tilt with it so I knew there were still some things to learn, and most importantly: how to do them properly, such as proper component architecture and breaking old habbits from ng1.

I didn't opt for React in this case, simply due to the need to stack more and more things on top of it to do what I'd need it to do. I wanted a framework that was going to take over routing and execution of complex UI controls, and keep items outside of a component's scope updated and react to events. This framework needed a comprehensive event emission system, data acquisition and handling, bi-directional data binding, state, and a series of things that you'd need to install separately for React to match up to what's already in the box with Angular.

I opted to stick to Angular instead of Vue for the fact that Angular also already has it's entire build system ready to go and comprehensivly built to deliver the tiniest version of it's deliverable. I was hosting this thing in a google cloud instance, so I needed to make sure the app stayed as small as possible, and could automatically trim out the cruft. This is where Angular's built in Tree Shaking took precedence for me.

Vue is more than capable of handling everything I'd need, and it was something I took serious considerion of. For instance, Vue poweres Cointiply, another bitcoin faucet application that's highly reactive and high componentized just like I wanted.

But I'd still need to learn Vue, I'd still need to configure it's build system, and I still wanted to use SCSS and TypeScript.

So Angular it was. ng8 is a great platform for building very complex user interfaces, and has many of the problems you'd inevitably face integrating a user interface to an application already figured out, and complete with a best practice recommendation.

React and Vue, given enough time and energy, are super capable platforms. No one can deny that. Angular's "A-Z Batteries Included" approach to the whole development process is what made it especially enticing this time.

55.4k views55.4k

Comments

Julius

PHP Engineer

Jan 31, 2020

Decided

It is a complete waste of time and life to learn a different framework to solve the same problem (Both AngularJS and Angular build A+ UI's, but both require a lot of time to learn). It's dumb to spend 200 hours learning AngularJS, then 200 hours learning Angular when you could spend 200 hours learning AngularJS and 200 hours learning how to solve a different problem (like AI/ML, Data Science, AR/VR, Digital Marketing, etc.)

115k views115k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Angular	JSF
It is a TypeScript-based open-source web application framework. It is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications.	It is used for building component-based user interfaces for web applications and was formalized as a standard through the Java Community
Progressive Web Apps; Native; Code Generation; Code Splitting	-
Statistics
GitHub Stars 99.2K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 26.7K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 3.8K	Stacks 138
Followers 4.8K	Followers 223
Votes 499	Votes 4
Pros & Cons
Pros 109 It's a powerful framework 53 Straight-forward architecture 48 TypeScript 45 Great UI and Business Logic separation 40 Powerful, maintainable, fast Cons 9 Overcomplicated 9 Large overhead in file size and initialization time 2 CLI not open to other test and linting tools 2 Ugly code	Pros 2 Rich and comprehensive Request Life-cycle 1 Very Mature UI framework 1 Server Side component
Integrations
Bugsnag Firebase Sentry Socket.IO	Java Java EE

What are some alternatives to Angular, JSF?

AngularJS

AngularJS lets you write client-side web applications as if you had a smarter browser. It lets you use good old HTML (or HAML, Jade and friends!) as your template language and lets you extend HTML’s syntax to express your application’s components clearly and succinctly. It automatically synchronizes data from your UI (view) with your JavaScript objects (model) through 2-way data binding.

Vue.js

It is a library for building interactive web interfaces. It provides data-reactive components with a simple and flexible API.

Ember.js

A JavaScript framework that does all of the heavy lifting that you'd normally have to do by hand. There are tasks that are common to every web app; It does those things for you, so you can focus on building killer features and UI.

Backbone.js

Backbone supplies structure to JavaScript-heavy applications by providing models key-value binding and custom events, collections with a rich API of enumerable functions, views with declarative event handling, and connects it all to your existing application over a RESTful JSON interface.

Aurelia

Aurelia is a next generation JavaScript client framework that leverages simple conventions to empower your creativity.

Mithril

Mithril is around 12kb gzipped thanks to its small, focused, API. It provides a templating engine with a virtual DOM diff implementation for performant rendering, utilities for high-level modelling via functional composition, as well as support for routing and componentization.

Quarkus

It tailors your application for GraalVM and HotSpot. Amazingly fast boot time, incredibly low RSS memory (not just heap size!) offering near instant scale up and high density memory utilization in container orchestration platforms like Kubernetes. We use a technique we call compile time boot.

Marionette

It is a JavaScript library with a RESTful JSON interface and is based on the Model–view–presenter application design paradigm. Backbone is known for being lightweight, as its only hard dependency is on one JavaScript library, Underscore.js, plus jQuery for use of the full library.

Ampersand.js

We <3 Backbone.js at &yet. It’s brilliantly simple and solves many common problems in developing clientside applications. But we missed the focused simplicity of tiny modules in node-land. We wanted something similar in style and philosophy, but that fully embraced tiny modules, npm, and browserify. Ampersand.js is a well-defined approach to combining (get it?) a series of intentionally tiny modules.

Durandal

Durandal is a cross-device, cross-platform client framework written in JS and designed to make Single Page Applications (SPAs) easy to create and maintain.

Related Comparisons

Angular 2 vs jsf: What are the differences?

Language: One significant difference between Angular 2 and JSF is the programming language they are based on. Angular 2 is written in TypeScript, which is a superset of JavaScript. On the other hand, JSF is based on Java, a statically-typed programming language. This means that developers working with Angular 2 will be more familiar with client-side JavaScript development, while those working with JSF will have a stronger background in Java.
Component-based Architecture: Angular 2 follows a component-based architecture, where the application is built by composing reusable components. This promotes reusability, modularity, and separation of concerns. In contrast, JSF uses a more traditional server-side rendering approach, where the application is composed of server-side Java classes and HTML templates. This can make it more suitable for traditional enterprise applications that require extensive server-side processing.
Two-way Data Binding: Angular 2 supports two-way data binding, which means that changes in the model can automatically update the view, and changes in the view can update the model. This simplifies the development process and reduces the amount of code needed to synchronize the model and the view. JSF, on the other hand, primarily uses one-way data binding, where changes in the model can update the view, but changes in the view do not automatically update the model. This can make data synchronization more manual and require additional code.
Dependency Injection: Angular 2 relies heavily on dependency injection, which allows for the easy management of object dependencies and promotes the separation of concerns. It provides a built-in dependency injection system that allows developers to control the instantiation and management of objects. JSF also supports dependency injection but relies more on the Java EE standards for dependency injection.
Routing: Angular 2 provides a powerful routing system out of the box, which allows developers to define routes for different URLs and map them to specific components. This makes it easy to create single-page applications with different views and navigation. JSF, on the other hand, does not have built-in routing capabilities and typically relies on a separate library or custom code to handle navigation.
Community and Ecosystem: Angular 2 has a large and active community of developers and a rich ecosystem of libraries, tools, and resources. The large community means that developers have access to a wealth of knowledge, documentation, and support. JSF also has an active community but is generally smaller compared to Angular 2. The ecosystem around JSF is more focused on enterprise applications, with extensive support for Java EE standards.

Angular 2 vs jsf

Overview