jquery vs dojo vs yui etc
in [JavaScript]
|
Prev: Interactive web-based graphs for iPads?
Next: FAQ Topic - How can I disable the back button in a web browser? (2010-06-17)
From: David Mark on 17 Jun 2010 06:58 On Jun 16, 11:58 pm, Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/16/2010 8:11 PM, David Mark wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 16, 10:32 pm, Garrett Smith<dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 6/16/2010 6:29 PM, David Mark wrote: > > >>> On Jun 16, 8:43 pm, Garrett Smith<dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On 6/16/2010 4:06 PM, David Mark wrote: > > >>>>> On Jun 16, 6:53 pm, Garrett Smith<dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On 6/16/2010 2:35 PM, David Mark wrote: > > >>>>>>> On Jun 16, 2:34 pm, Joe Nine<j...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Does anyone have any links to very convincing articles that eloquently > >>>>>>>> state the major flaws of these libraries? I'm not considering using any > >>>>>>>> of them, I've heard enough here to know how bad they are. I just want a > >>>>>>>> few article links to keep in my back pocket that I can fire back when > >>>>>>>> someone suggests we use one of them. > > >> [...] > > >>>>> I've done all of the hard work. You yourself were just parroting some > >>>>> of it recently. > > >>>> That is untrue. > > >>> History says otherwise. > > >>>> I've have never wanted to copy anything of yours. > > >>> Then I assume you've done so repeatedly at gunpoint. > > >> Lets be very clear on this: There is nothing of yours that I have > >> copied. Ever. > > > Let's be very clear. You have. Perhaps, for whatever reason, you > > don't even realize it. > > >> If you believe otherwise, then it's time for you to get very specific > >> with an example. > > > Haven't we been over *that* enough times? Start with your recent > > obsession with queries and attributes vis-a-vis jQuery. > > So let me get this straight: I reviewed code from jQuery. This bothers > you because you believe that I copied you. > > Did I get that right? No, it's one of your usual purposeful oversimplifications. You copied the one-off feature test from me too. See, I can generalize too! IIRC, your comment at the time (as you did this here in public) was that you were changing your whole library to use it as you previously just had flags. Go ahead, deny it. I'll dig that one up for sure. :) > > [...] > > > > > All I know is that you've done neither. Meanwhile, my patterns have > > found their way into all of the "major" libraries. Yours too I'm > > sure. > > [...] > > I've looked for, but found no unit tests. If I'm going to use something, > I want to run tests on it to verify the edge cases. You are blind as a bat.
From: Bwig Zomberi on 17 Jun 2010 07:48 Joe Nine wrote: > I've seen enough examples of code that's using jQuery on here to know > that I don't want to become a jQuery programmer - it's like it's own new > language with an ugly perl-like syntax. I guess it's one for the > programmers that prefer unix. I'm a windows guy myself and like "classic > syntax" languages. I guess that's why I've never got into complex > regular expressions either. Javascript syntax is based on C or Java if you like. C was first written for Unix, which was written for the most part in C. jQuery is born ugly. Unix played no part in its birth or parenting. -- Bwig Zomberi
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 17 Jun 2010 08:24 Garrett Smith wrote: > I've looked for, but found no unit tests. If I'm going to use something, > I want to run tests on it to verify the edge cases. What's wrong with JsUnit? <http://www.jsunit.net/> PointedEars -- var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = ( navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1 && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1 ) // Plone, register_function.js:16
From: Joe Nine on 17 Jun 2010 09:12 Bwig Zomberi wrote: > Joe Nine wrote: >> I've seen enough examples of code that's using jQuery on here to know >> that I don't want to become a jQuery programmer - it's like it's own new >> language with an ugly perl-like syntax. I guess it's one for the >> programmers that prefer unix. I'm a windows guy myself and like "classic >> syntax" languages. I guess that's why I've never got into complex >> regular expressions either. > > Javascript syntax is based on C or Java if you like. I know. I imagine everyone here does. > C was first written for Unix, which was written for the most part in C. I learned that in class too. I don't see the relevance to anything though. > jQuery is born ugly. Unix played no part in its birth or parenting. I doubt anyone thinks it has any relation to unix.
From: VK on 17 Jun 2010 09:18
On Jun 17, 4:52 am, Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > However, it touches on a core antipattern of Quooxdoo, Cappuccino and > SproutCore. It's not a new technique. > > It would be good for the article to do one of > 1) focus entirely on one library > 2) focus or a problem that is solved and show how libraries solve it, > with examples from the library, and then show an alternative. > 3) focus on an antipattern > > I'm going to publish an article next week, after it has been reviewed > and edited (the draft is being reviewed now). The article will cover > some things here, but it is not a formal review, as I have outlined. I'd > really like to see that, and if it is a good one, probably even more > than the article I'm working on. The jealousness is great in this NG, so I am afraid it will just another vanity fair with "what dork would do like that / what idiot would code like this??!". I distinctly remember back in 2005-2006, when the 2nd Browser Wars started, this NG was nearly attacked with asks to suggests any good library, "please, please, please". The locals could use it to push *any* programming pattern they like, literally, so now would be getting the harvest back. Instead the energy was spend to call sh*t on anyone not willing to write the code from the scratch. Eventually such demands stopped, people left: for Prototype.js, MooTools, Dojo etc. And what else was it expected? No help from clj - no help from anywhere? For a core library covering coding/DOM trivia the train is pretty much gone. It is hard but very important to understand. No one gives a damn how perfect, universal, robust, everlasting a commercial use library is by design. The only important things are: how long is it on the market (2years min), how many listed bugs fixed (lesser that 100 means that at least 20-50 really nasty ones will have to be fixed with your business loss), how good the support is. And the last but not least nobody really cares what library is bad and why. People normally want to know what library is the most usable / the best and why. If the consensus still is that there is not such library and the only sane option is to write your own from the scratch then it is better to stop the discussion right here so not making another fun out of yourselves. To appreciate the deep of the fun at the modern time, go say to comp.lang.c++.moderated and declare the evilness of any library usage starting with STL. P.S. What about The Javascript Toolbox http://www.javascripttoolbox.com/ by Matt Kruse as a positive starting point? |