For my understanding, node.js is a javascript-engine which is running javascript-code without using a browser(window-global). You can use javascript on a server. But I saw now a lot of tutorials(react, angular, vue etc.). In every tutorial, I have to install something with npm. I can follow there are several dev-tools which I can use on my local machine to minimize my javscript-files or compile sass to css. But in the end, when I put my files on a webserver, I just have normal javascript-files, css-files etc. No node.js code in it, right?
My question is: React, angular, vue.js etc. are written in just normal javascript without node.js right? The reason why I use npm ist just to install every dependencies with one command, right?
A question more: Is there an any recommended order to learn all these frontend-development stuff? There are so much words I have to google it: angular.js, react, vue.js, vanilla.js, typescript, backbone.js, bower, grunt, webpack, yarn etc... I dont know where I start, so I look into few tutorials, but everytime I go through these tutorials, there is a new word(technology) I have to research.
I think you're getting your terminology a little muddled.
Node.js is a JavaScript runtime, built on Google Chrome’s V8 JavaScript engine. However, that is not to say that Node programs are executed in a browser. They aren’t. Rather, the creator of Node (Ryan Dahl) took the V8 engine and enhanced it with various features (such as a file system API and an HTTP library) to create a program we can use to execute JavaScript on our computers.
Node comes bundled with a package manager called npm which you can use to install packages (such as React and Angular) from the npm registry. These packages are indeed written in normal JavaScript (or a language that compiles to JavaScript, such as TypeScript).
The reason why I use npm is just to install every dependencies with one command, right?
Kinda. You can certainly use npm to install dependencies. However, it does a lot more that that. For example you can use npm scripts to carry out various build tasks, or you can create a package yourself and use npm to publish it to the registry.
A question more: Is there an any recommended order to learn all these frontend-development stuff?
As with everything, it depends. What are you trying to build? It's relatively pointless to learn about Node, npm, React and Angular if you are attempting to build a simple static website. If I were you, I'd define a clear goal and set about learning the technologies you'll need to reach that goal. Saying that, if you are doing anything with front-end development, learning about npm will be a good use of your time.
Here's an article by way of further reading that explains things a little more: https://www.sitepoint.com/an-introduction-to-node-js/
Related
I understand that when we talk about the frontend we're talking about files being served to the browser of the person accessing my page. So, frontend javascript libraries are only javascript code that is being sent from my server to the browser.
So far everything is fine, what I don't understand is why npm has repositories for frontend libraries. Let's take this Leaflet example, I can install this library with npm using npm install leaflet -s. But what would be the purpose of doing that? I see that if I open Visual Studio Code and I declare this library with const leaflet = require('leaflet') then I can see its functions and documentation in a more clear way on the suggestions after typing leaflet.... I don't think that's the purpose of installing a library like Leaflet on Node.js though (since it works only on the frontend). What am I missing? Why would anyone install frontend only libraries on Node.js?
There are likely other reasons, but this is they reason I've done it and the reason I've seen other people do it: Many people use Node.js tooling to bundle/build webapps, so you might install your frontend dependencies, and then use rollup or webpack or browserify or TypeScript tooling or whatever to bundle it into a single .js file. Since you're likely already installing the tooling with npm, installing the libraries also with npm means you don't need some other tool to do it.
Additionally, people also use npm to install libraries for electron apps, cordova apps, React Native apps, etc. And these things can all use frontend libraries because they basically have a web view embedded. (To be honest, I'm not sure that's the case with React Native because I've never used it, but I assume it is.)
Since you mention Leaflet specifically, here is an example of someone using npm to install leaflet, and then using browserify to make it so that they can basically write Node.js code (including require('leaflet') and run it in the browser.
I'm a beginner in ReactJS also for NodeJS. I would love to know why we have to install NodeJS run ReactJS application as ReactJS is client-side scripting.
The other answer is incorrect.
You don't NEED Node.js, in fact you could create a project without running a single npm command. Just follow this guide.
The main reason, as pointed out in the article, is:
Easy package management. This means you can upgrade the package easily later on
JSX is the templating language that makes it way easier to write components: <h1>Hello Word</h1> reads so much better than React.createElement('h1', null, 'Hello World')
Managing module imports, as opposed to having global variables around everywhere, it's great to have encapsulation and import modules as needed.
Build step and workflow. For a modern project, you will need tools to minify your code, cache busting, transpiling (writing pure javascript for old browser is a pain and you really shouldn't do it manually), the list goes on and on.
Because almost all the JavaScript libraries/frameworks are using the Node Package Manager (NPM), that makes much more convenient to manage JavaScript dependencies in general, both client-side and server-side.
Edit: It's not really technically necessary, but using a package manager is the best practice for managing dependencies and sub-dependencies.
Of course, you don't have to. When you are in the development step, you can install it for package management. Only webpack is needed to bundle, compile, transpile the code.
I'm working on a web application that currently uses vuejs for part of its interface. The back-end is NOT in Node, so there is currently no package.json file or any tool from the typical npm stack in this repository.
We already have a bunch of non-npm dependencies that need to be installed in order to use the repository, so my coworkers aren't too open about the idea of adding another layer of complexity. I can't blame them for that, it's the reason why I use npm scripts and not even gulp in my other projects. I'm tired of spending hours learning and configuring build tools that never end up doing what I want anyway.
But since the vue-cli tool no longer includes the build command, I'm a bit stuck. Is there really no more CLI app to build vue files at all? And if so, what would be the smart way to use vue without webpack? Template strings are not maintainable at all, and <script type="text/x-template"> don't work when you want to use multiple components from multiple files in the same page.
I realize your question says 'without webpack' but you may be interested in backpack - a CLI app i came across for building Vue.js without requiring you to write any configuration code. It is basically webpack preconfigured as a minimalistic build system for Node.js. It provides two commands, dev for live reload enabled development and build for building you project.
I am new to angular2 and I have never used angular1.
I have been trying this tutorial https://angular.io/guide/quickstart and
i wonder if all the recommended dependencies are really necessary because my project size gets big after 'npm install' (more than 100Mb).
You won't necessarily use all of the #angular dependencies during the Quickstart, but if you continue on with their tutorial and as your app gets more complex, you will definitely utilize them.
The other packages are necessary. They consist of typescript compilers, libraries for Observables, and more Angular 2 features. Here is a quick read for info on some of these.
If you're using angular-cli, calling ng serve will also run a series of automated tests that depend on packages.
I'm working on including Ember into an already deployed Node/Express/EJS application. I don't want to disrupt any of the existing application behavior, but instead, want build out any additional feature to the app using Ember. The server side code for these new features has already been built, and each endpoint returns the JSON format that Ember Data expects. I've been looking into Ember App Kit and Ember-cli, but I'm not sure how to include these tools into my existing directory structure, and I'm not certain if these are in face the right tools for my use case. Does anyone have any experience with this particular use case?
For example, navigating to /foo returns the existing express route that renders an ejs template, but /bar would be an Ember route that hits the api endpoint of the same name.
Use ember-cli (ember-cli.org). It's perfect for this situation as it allows you to rapidly prototype out your ember app. It even comes with an expressJS based testing suite and mocks server.
Once you are ready to incorporate it to your NodeJS, Flask, or whatever other application all static files should be available in the ember-cli dist directory.
Just don't forget to build the ember-cli project before porting via the means of ember build. After that it's just a simple matter of moving the files in the ember projects dist folder into wherever you need in your environment.
Just to embellish a bit: Ember-cli has a great work-flow for use while building your ember app. Try ember serve for a quick example. I mention this because it speaks to your question of how to incorporate this into your existing project (by project, I assume you may mean workflow). I typically will build ember projects purely using ember-cli and consider the back-end (usually a REST-API exposed via either Flask or NodeJS) a separate concern. When importing the app all I have to concern myself with is making sure my server serves the correct static dist files.
I would not recommend using the Ember App Kit (EAK) as it has been deprecated in favor of ember-cli. It really is.. much, much better.
Ok so I'm going to try to be more complete in this answer. Let's start with the isolated question - ember-cli or eak? Definitely Ember-Cli, but why?
EAK is officially heading for deprecation in favor of ember-cli.
Ember-cli produces more structured, cleaner, maintainable ember code.
Ember-cli integrates your entire ember-app workflow.
Managing all types of dependencies and assets is made simple via bower install --save and Brocfile.js edits. (See the ember-cli docus for explanation)
Now the more complicated part of the question. How do I integrate this with an existing workflow? I recently ran into this when building a webrtc-included ember app. It just so happened that this was my first real use of ember as well. So, not yet realizing the full potential of my new hammer I wrote the REST API, Backend ORM layer, the signalling service, the session cache, and built a complete CI workflow first. Then I was ready to build my ember app and ended up in your exact position.
To short circuit a long story - the lesson I learned was that I should treat my ember-cli app like a completely separate concern. What I mean here is - there's my backend (NodeJS, Apache, Nginx... whatever) and what I code here is built, tested and integrated separately. It normally even lives in its own git repository. It's a separate concern to my front end equation which typically would consist of several components itself. My I-Phone Native app would have its own workflow from build-to-test and integrate to my backend via a REST API. My Android native app another. My web app another. For all intents and purposes, in my workflow these are entirely separate workflows that only tie together when we start talking Continuous Integration.
There's a lot of arguments for why you'd want to do this. Most importantly - it scales.
The beauty of ember-cli is that it makes it fairly trivial to get a workflow for your ember app going and trivial to redeploy your app + workflow on a new box/instance. I would certainly recommend referring to the official ember-cli setup instructions but I'm going to include them here in case the URL goes bad one day:
No really, refer to the link my instructions will suck in comparison...
Deploying a new Ember App
Install NodeJS, NPM and Git (ember-cli will as a default load git going for you on new apps) on your system via sudo apt-get install nodejs and sudo apt-get install npm, sudo apt-get install git.
Note: On Ubuntu 14.04 and some other Debian systems use sudo apt-get install nodejs-legacy instead. If in doubt, use legacy. If you experience problems using the node command after install, it's definitely that you need to use nodejs-legacy. Don't bother trying to do the linking manually.
Install required node modules globally: sudo npm install -g ember-cli, sudo npm install -g bower, sudo npm install -g phantomjs
Create new ember-cli app: cd <Desired Directory>, ember new my-app-name
Now you can look at ember help to begin learning how to use ember-cli. Hint: The --dry-run flag is your friend. You'll notice that when you installed ember-cli all the scaffolding was taken care of for you. You'll see that you can add things with simple ember generate commands and they will not only create the required objects, but the test files as well. Best of all, using ember serve you can start scaffolding your app and via simple flags you can configure the test server to actually proxy and use your already-existing REST API (if you have one) or the expressJS mocks server to build a psuedo-API.
Integrating it with your larger workflow from here is a simple matter of configuring whatever tools you use (I use Jenkins and Ansible for this kind of stuff) to distribute the dist folder of ember-cli to where it should go to be served as static content (it is just a single page webapp in the end).
If you want to instead play with an existing ember-cli app that operates in an isolated workflow and already makes use of most of the goodies in order to get some familiarity - as I suspect you'll quickly realize how to fit this into whatever your current structure is - feel free to clone and play with this one here.
And so finally - to answer the more specific question of how this might fit into an existing directory structure, I would break this down into two categories. When we're talking src - I would have it in it's own "structure", separated at least by being in a separate sub-directory of its own. When we're talking built and deliverable I would include the contents of the /dist folder in whatever static web server directory you want to serve your ember app from.
EDIT: I Added some more detail - hopefully useful details below the line break. Let me know if you have more questions or if I can explain anything better.
I am facing a similar situation. I am planning to use EAK as a "prototyping tool" in a separate project folder. Then build the distribution directory from EAK using grunt dist and insert that into the assets folder of my main Node.js project.