I'm wondering if there's at least some community consensus on how to write reusable Angular2 code in TypeScript. I tried to summarise what I found out and what I'd like to know in context of Angular2.
Module/App directory structure and file names
In the official tutorial I see they put all code into app directory and all dependencies like node_modules or typings are in the parent directory.
Lowercase file names, .component.ts suffix for components and .service.ts for services. They put all files to the same directory which is going to be a huge mess?
One class/interface/enum per file. For classes, functions, interfaces and other names its probably best to stick to Coding guidelines for TypeScript by Microsoft?
Modules
Should modules compile and bundle themselves using postinstall npm hook? Or is it better to provide bundled version directly on git like most JavaScript libraries do?
Should I stick to system type of modules by default when I'm expecting that my module's going to be used only by browser or is it better to always use UMD?
Is there any reason to use CommonJS or AMD instead of system?
Using 3rd party modules
Should I expect that other developers will embed my modules with <script> tags or they'll load it using System.import()?
If my modules has dependencies on other JavaScript libraries, is it better to provide a bundled version of my whole module with all dependencies or just define them in package.json?
There's the Angular 2 Style Guide (https://github.com/mgechev/angular2-style-guide), as featured in Angular2 News:
The purpose of the following style guide is to present a set of best practices and style guidelines for the development of Angular 2 applications. If you are looking for an opinionated style guide for syntax, conventions...
Angular 1 had a community accepted style guide written by John Papa. There will be something similar created for Angular 2 in fact you can see the start of this coming together with the Tour of Heroes examples in place at angular.io
Related
I have been looking for a way to mostly share some code between projects specifically for SPFX and fluent ui. We found 3 main ways to do that.
1.
Creating a component library is the way that seemed least complicated cause it uses the same infrastructure and do all building without the need to configure it.
But this adds some issues, we need to built and manually link the solution locally to make it work, this will also work if we put in a repo. so this is mitigated.
The second is that implicitly this will also require the fluent ui and react. Plus having to place it inside a SPFX component library project.
2.
I saw some promise using paths in ts and this works fine while using the ts compiler. It will go to the folder that your proj is referring and build it at calling time. which is great. But it did not work in SPFX.
3.
Another way was to have a post install to sync the folders which seems easy enough but I wonder how practical this is plus how people are doing it, if they are, how.
All I wanted to figure out now is a way to take my component code and share as if they were in a folder of my src or a simple extension of the code. No need to have extra dependencies or build steps, just the code that can be used as a ts/tsx file. ex:
shared lib:
//assuming I have react and fluentui already installed for the project.
import button from 'fluentui';
export const fancyCustomButtom = (props) => {
return (<Button text="Standard" />);
};
src project folder:
import {fancyCustomButtom} from 'shared-lib'
It is fine if it needs to build the files before we can use it but can we do it at build time or when the package is installed? also wouldn't it increase my bundle size by making both module dependent on things already available (react, fluentui)?
Given the way Microsoft have architected the loading of bundles in SharePoint and Teams - I believe an SPFX component library is the best way to share code between different solutions, particularly if you are looking to minimise bundle size...
Imagine you have a library for something re-usable: a form, a set of standard branded components - something of that nature. You could put your shared code in repos and add references to it - either by publishing your own repo publicly or using the npm install git+https://yourUrl syntax; but what effectively happens there is that your code is pulled down in to node_modules for each project, and any referenced module code is included in your bundles. If you have two, three, four or more webparts on the same page - using those same libraries, you're multiplying how many times that code is included on the page.
If you follow Microsoft's guide on setting up a component library project however, your npm link commands allow your types to be recognised in consuming projects without needing to actually include the bundled distribution code. You can deploy your library code once to the App Catalog, and if it's referenced in other solutions -- it's loaded on pages as needed: once.
I have found the development experience to be quite flaky at times, but it does work. When I run gulp clean on my library code, or come back to it after some time, I sometimes find that I need to run npm link and npm link my-project-name again as per the instructions in the above tutorial. Whenever you run gulp build on your library, you should also rebuild the project that consumes the library, either by using gulp build / bundle or by saving a file (if you're running gulp serve). This process works well for developing, and once it comes time to deploy, all you need to do is add a named reference to your library inside package.json and then deploy both .sppkg files to your App Catalog.
In terms of your last question re: bundle size - react is not actually included in the dependencies for an SPFX library project, but you will find it's available to use. When you build your library, if you take a look in the generated javascript in your dist folder, you will see it's listed as one of the dependencies for the webpacked content along with react-dom and ControlStrings. It's on line 1.
office-ui-fabric-react is included as a devDependency thanks to the #microsoft/sp-webpart-workbench package that gets scaffolded with all SPFX projects - and if you check your library's dist javascript, you will see that included components are being webpacked and included in your bundle. I'm not entirely sure if when you pull this code in to your consuming project, whether webpack then tree-shakes to de-duplicate and ensures only necessary code is included: I don't know. Someone else may be able to illuminate us there or provide a more accurate explanation of what's going on... I will update this response if anyone comments to let me know.
And finally, this is more of a personal way of working, but it may be worth consideration:
When developing a library, I sometimes reference it in other projects via a local npm install ../filepath command. This ensures that when I install the library as described, the consuming project installs any necessary dependencies. I'm able to tweak both projects if I need o. When it comes time to deploy, I commit my changes to both projects, deploy my library code to the App Catalog, and then npm uninstall the library from the consuming project and add a reference as described in the above tutorial. When I deploy projects that use my library, they just work.
I recently developed a library that uses pnpjs, in particular the #pnp/sp library that is used to talk to SharePoint. If you look at the Getting Started guide for that library, they expect you to pass a reference to your Application Customizer or Web Part context during setup, or explicitly set things up using a base URL and so forth - and of course, a library doesn't really have a page context of any sort - the whole point of this code is that it's reusable. So that poses a challenge. My solution was to do the setup in the consuming web part(s) and ensure that they pass a reference to the sp object (which is of type SPRest) to any code or components that exist in my library. My library has peerDependencies on those pnp libraries so that the code isn't duplicated in consuming projects. Sometimes you have to think about what your library needs to include in its bundle and what you expect consuming solutions to already have, and maybe find ways to ensure things aren't included that aren't needed.
For example, in the scenario you talk about, you may want to ensure fluentui or office-ui-fabric-react are only devDependencies or peerDependencies for your library. As long as your library and the project(s) consuming your library both use the right version(s) you shouldn't have any trouble, and you can document any pre-requisites with your library documentation. You can check which versions of these libraries are installed per the SPFX version you are currently using ie. SPFX v1.11 or v1.12 etc. Just run npm ls <packagename> to get a breakdown, or check your package.json file.
Hey guys since I am learning angular js I am confused about angular js installation.
1) In some tutorials people have used angular js library just like we import jquery in HTML file.for e.g.
src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/angularjs/1.6.9/angular.min.js"
2) and on the other hand npm is used to install angular which creates scaffolding of angular application.
So what is difference between these two methods?
Which one is best method?
It depends on your needs.
Installing angularjs with npm gives you the possibility to minify and concat all your javascript files in only one for exemple.
It allows you for example if you use babel to transpile your javascript es6 code into classic javascript file.
Another thing is that in some IDE (advanced code editors) like webstorm, you have some helpfull funcyions with for exemple automplete on the node modules or on the functions.
With webpack you can use the import statement to separate all your javascript files and combine them before.
In fact, if you have to create a big project with a lot of different files, you want better performances, you want to minify and concat all your files into a single file, use npm with gulp/webpack.
If you want to create a simple project for yourself and you don't want to take a lot of time to learn/configure all of that, use simple CDN.
hopes it helps you.
I am developing a NodeJS application, and was thinking about the best way to develop a plugin system. Currently, most components on the application are already decoupled in a way that they can be registered in and out to add and/or remove functionality. But currently, those components are still spread across many folders inside the app source. My goal would be to have a plugins folder, with a sub-folder for each plugin, and the application would scan said folder on startup to load the plugins. Also, as a nice plus, I'd love to load plugins from the node_modules (inspired by the way babel handles presets in version 6). I already have a fairly good idea how this system will work.
Now, my question is what is the best way to provide access to common files and classes, to the plugins. Let's say that I have a base class Receiver, and a plugin registers a custom receiver (which will extend the base class Receiver). How do I provide access for all theose classes to an external npm module without creating an object and passing each manually?
I use ES6 imports which replace the node's require function in my code, and use relative paths, but to be honest, I've never really understood how babel implements these module loaders and how could I use a dynamic module loader.
I was looking at Differential's meteor-boilerplate app and noticed that they do not use a bootstrap package and also saw a directory/file in the client directory that is related - client/compatibility/bootstrap.js
I was wondering if anyone had an explanation for why/when you'd want to avoid using a package like twbs:bootstrap and when you'd need to create a compatibility file.
I would say that it's the lazy path to include external libraries in a Meteor application.
You basically have two ways to achieve this include:
The road of glory. Create a package (meteor create --package), clone the source inside it, then edit and "Meteorize" the source (declare package-scoped variables instead of window-scoped, ...). You can then publish this package on Atmosphere so that others can benefit of it.
Copy/paste everything in a client/compatibility folder.
As explained in the docs, everything in this folder is not embraced with an IIFE and is executed before the other code files.
When you have the time to, be brave and take the heroes path.
I maintain and collaborate on some JavaScript modules written in CommonJS that are in need of high-quality UMD wrappers.
The dependencies are sourced from npm but have at least CommonJS and AMD support (or I can add it).
The CommonJS version goes on npm The UMD wrapped module will be pushed to bower
The wrapper must work in browsers (AMD + globals), and in Node.js (any and other CommonJS systems if possible). Any automation should preferably happen using Grunt (I'm pretty handy in grunt).
I've spend ages trawling Google en SO but it is a huge mess.
Some hopeful ones that don't quite cut it (or I am missing something, which is entirely possible):
browserify
gluejs
grunt-umd
I'm finding desperate constructs like this everywhere: http://rathercurio.us/building-umd-modules-with-dependencies-with-browserify , but I'm not really cool with such hackery.
Any good tips on this? I'll take any pointer or link or tip.
Edit: clarification: that last thing said, the ideal solution should not require us to assemble chunks of boilerplate template code by hand and create new bugs. I cool with configuring and specifying stuff though.
Your 1st and last stop should be urequire.org, the Universal Module Converter that does much more that just converting CommonJS and AMD javascript modules to UMD (or AMD or CommonJS or a standalone using rjs/almond).
It allows you to manipulate Module's code and dependencies while converting: inject, replace or remove code and dependencies, export to global objects (window) or your bundle, inject & optionally merge common code (like initializations), add runtime information, minify and much much more.
Most of that using simple but hugely powerful declarations & optionally callbacks for fine grained manipulation. It works with standalone config files (.js, .coffee, .json, .yml etc) and as-is as a gruntjs config
uRequire compiles from source modules written in javascript, coffeescript, livescriped, coco & icedcoffeescript without any plugins.
Forget boilerplate, code ceremony and repeating requires. The conversion templates are based on the well known UMDjs but can be customized via declarations to hide or provide functionality.
uRequire is opensource, MIT license and hosted on github and authored by me :-)