to learn jQuery if already using prototype
in [JavaScript]
|
From: liketofindoutwhy on 17 Apr 2008 08:19 On Apr 15, 4:47 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...(a)web.de> wrote: > liketofindoutwhy wrote: > > I am learning more and more Prototype and Script.aculo.us and got the > > Bungee book... and wonder if I should get some books on jQuery (jQuery > > in Action, and Learning jQuery) and start learning about it too? > > [...] > > Prototype.js, and consequently everything based upon it, like > Script.aculo.us, is junk. The jQuery junk support forums are > elsewhere, too. So you mean Prototype and jQuery are both junk? Can you give some points as to why you think so? For example, how else would you pass a call back function binding to the current scope, such as processData.bind(this) ? I kind of like the arr.each(function(x) { ... }) or the arr.sort().uniq().join(" ") syntax.
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 17 Apr 2008 08:20 liketofindoutwhy wrote: > On Apr 15, 4:47 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...(a)web.de> > wrote: >> Prototype.js, and consequently everything based upon it, like >> Script.aculo.us, is junk. The jQuery junk support forums are >> elsewhere, too. > > So you mean Prototype and jQuery are both junk? Can you give some > points as to why you think so? I want popcorn. PointedEars -- Use any version of Microsoft Frontpage to create your site. (This won't prevent people from viewing your source, but no one will want to steal it.) -- from <http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm>
From: humeniuc on 17 Apr 2008 11:31 On Apr 16, 2:47 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...(a)web.de> wrote: > Prototype.js, and consequently everything based upon it, like > Script.aculo.us, is junk. The jQuery junk support forums are > elsewhere, too. > > PointedEars The list of the ones who uses, and consider Prototype or jQuery is good coded is long... very long. Some famous users: Apple(http://www.apple.com/) uses Prototype Google code (http://code.google.com/) uses jQuery NASA(http://www.nasa.gov/) uses Prototype Mozilla Addons (http://addons.mozilla.org/) uses jQuery CNN (betaversion http://beta.cnn.com/) uses Prototype I think PointedEars is wrong. If he could do better than jQuery, Prototype, or YUI, maybe he could make examples of his 'great' work. But i think he could not.
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 17 Apr 2008 11:57 humeniuc wrote: > On Apr 16, 2:47 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...(a)web.de> > wrote: >> Prototype.js, and consequently everything based upon it, like >> Script.aculo.us, is junk. The jQuery junk support forums are >> elsewhere, too. >> [...] > > The list of the ones who uses, and consider Prototype or jQuery is > good coded is long... very long. > Some famous users: > > Apple(http://www.apple.com/) uses Prototype > Google code (http://code.google.com/) uses jQuery > NASA(http://www.nasa.gov/) uses Prototype > Mozilla Addons (http://addons.mozilla.org/) uses jQuery > CNN (betaversion http://beta.cnn.com/) uses Prototype So what? They all have made the wrong design decision. Whether source code is good is not defined by those who use it but by the source code itself. Yours is an "appeal to authority" fallacy, BTW. > I think PointedEars is wrong. If he could do better than jQuery, > Prototype, or YUI, maybe he could make examples of his 'great' work. > But i think he could not. And an ad hominem fallacy in addition. PointedEars -- realism: HTML 4.01 Strict evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict madness: XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml -- Bjoern Hoehrmann
From: Gregor Kofler on 17 Apr 2008 13:32
humeniuc meinte: > The list of the ones who uses, and consider Prototype or jQuery is > good coded is long... very long. > Some famous users: And I suppose equally groundbreaking when it comes to web authoring. > Apple(http://www.apple.com/) uses Prototype The website is HTML 4 *Transitional* - still issues several warnings. YSlow rates it "F". Flexible layouts? Never heard of these. > Google code (http://code.google.com/) uses jQuery More or less the same. Can't find jQuery in the scripts list, perhaps it is included in another one. > NASA(http://www.nasa.gov/) uses Prototype As another one with pointed ears would have put it: "Fascinating". Proprietary doctype. 48 warnings. Again: Layouting from the last century. Starts with: <script type="text/javascript"> /** * Browser Detect Class (sic!) */ function detectBrowserClass(modern){ var nBrowser = navigator.appName; var nVersion = navigator.appVersion; var nAgent = navigator.userAgent; this.version; this.browser; this.os; this.modern = (typeof modern == 'object') == true ? modern:0; if(nVersion.indexOf('Windows') !=-1){ this.os = 'win'; }else{ this.os = (nVersion.indexOf('Macintosh') !=-1) == true ? 'mac':'other'; } Those guys definitely know, what they're doing... Apart from that they've added around 400kB of various JS libraries. Seems as if prototype isn't capable of anything. > CNN (betaversion http://beta.cnn.com/) uses Prototype Super slow loading - about 50% of the 630kB payload is eaten up by JS files... > I think PointedEars is wrong. If he could do better than jQuery, > Prototype, or YUI, maybe he could make examples of his 'great' work. He frequently posts links to his "work". Anyway, I suppose since Richard Cornford, Douglas Crockford, Randy Webb and others also question the quality of these libraries frequently, they're clueless ignorants, too. Gregor -- http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur f�r den alpinen Raum |