Angular 2 was a big departure from Angular 1. It is such a radical rewrite that we should be careful not to get the two confused – especially as most of the world is still using the original version.
Now I don’t want to be pedantic here, and I realise that “Angular 2” kind of means that second-attempt at Angular, but this is following semantic versioning now and is already up to Angular 4.
Fair enough, you might mean v2+; the latest semantic version of the second-attempt. But somewhere is a codebase which hasn’t managed to adopt v3 yet (it does after all signify a breaking version), so there is a distinction between Angular 2 as in v2+, and actual v2.
The Angular bods (Angles?) have already given us a nice distinction between v1 and v2+. The former is “AngularJS” (it always was) and the latter is simply “Angular”. Now I expect that most people used “Angular” without the “Jay Ess”, which means that the short-form of the name could also mean either version to different people.
But it’s still better than calling it Angular 2 when we are fast approaching v5!
Semantic versioning for other things
Numbering is a bit of an annoyance for me. There is no better infinite sequence of ordered indices with which to identify inarguable relative positions. So how come numbers themselves seem to get screwed up? I call for semantic versioning of all things. And I don’t mean that everything should have major, minor and build numbers. Just that the numbers should be in the right bloomin’ order!
Java 2 was actually Java 1.2
The Xbox One was the 3rd Xbox
And the house numbering in various cutely named cul-de-sacs where I live are extremely messed up. Separating odds and evens is just the beginning of the stupidity. Fair enough – settlements grow and a neat linear arrangement can’t always be maintained. But it could at least start that way. Numbers come one after another: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and there are plenty more where they came from. But houses are 1, 3, 5 on one side and 2, 4, 6 in a different direction somewhere else. How is the postman supposed to know where to deliver the next generation Xbox Zero when it comes out?
Talking of “Zero”, what the heck is Coke Zero Sugar? Coke Zero already had no sugar. Or caffeine (I think – to be honest I lost track when the cans turned gold). So does Zero Sugar mean it has no sugar but does have caffeine? Isn’t that just Diet Coke? Or does it mean it’s Coke Zero with sugar – i.e. Caffeine-free Coke?
Enough! All drinks should employ a binary addition system. 0 = water, 1 = flavour, 2 = sugar, 4 = aspartame, 8 = caffeine, 16 = alcohol, 32 = carbonation. Just add them up and slap a label on the front. Coke Zero would then be water. And that did actually exist at one time so it’s not at all a daft suggestion.
The end, or is that 10-4…