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: Joe Nine on 16 Jun 2010 14:34 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.
From: Matt Kruse on 16 Jun 2010 14:53 On Jun 16, 1:34 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? A post like this in here is like throwing row meat into a tank of piranhas. Enjoy! Matt Kruse
From: Garrett Smith on 16 Jun 2010 17:31 On 6/16/2010 11:34 AM, Joe Nine 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. Maybe next week.
From: David Mark on 16 Jun 2010 17:35 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 reviewed salient bits of all three in the last six months or so. Search the archive. In short, jQuery is terribly inept and unneeded, YUI is terribly botched and bloated and Dojo is just plain terrible. Reading the exchanges in their respective developer forums (or on sites like Hacker News and Stack Overflow) is quite enlightening as well. Seeing the "experts" (your prospective support staff) in action should be an eye-opening experience. In many cases, you shouldn't need to know the technical ins and outs of what they are discussing. Just look at the quality of the discourse (try this, try that, show me where it fails, etc.) Look at how many questions go unresolved. Look how testy they get when told they are wrong. Look at the aliases. Look at the (deliberately) goofy pictures. Would you accept advice of any kind (let alone technical guidance) from these people?
From: Garrett Smith on 16 Jun 2010 18:53
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 reviewed salient bits of all three in the last six months or so. > Search the archive. > > In short, jQuery is terribly inept and unneeded, YUI is terribly > botched and bloated and Dojo is just plain terrible. > Pure opinion. Anybody can say that about anything. Example: Disco sucks. The design of the Prius is terribly botched. The US Government is just plain terrible. Easy, right? A no-nonsense analysis demonstrating major shortcomings is not easy, but would be valuable. The article should provide a concise summary of problems, elaborate on that, with examples, link to any pertinent standards, and finally, provide advice on what the reader should do instead of using that. The summary should be something that can be explained simply and should be understandable by anyone. The exposition should elaborate on that. For example: Summary of library X: * String methods slow * method M doesn't work consistently in browsers * silly and useless methods [elaboration of each point, with examples] [reasons the bugs can't be simply patched/design analysis] [alternative] [Conclusion recapping on problems an alternative.] A couple of years back I did areview on Prototype.js: http://dhtmlkitchen.com/?category=/JavaScript/&date=2008/06/17/&entry=Prototype-js-A-Review In that review, I painfully showed how the library works. Something as complicated as that should be explained, so that it can be fully appreciated. Prototype.js has mostly died out since then. I would like to see such articles. I would, but I am busy with JSON stuff and writing a test runner. I will be publishing an article next week related to the W3C Selectors library, too. I don't have time for another article. Dojo is nearly dead, so that one is low hanging fruit. jQuery and YUI might be good subject matter for changing the industry. As a final emphasis, the article should emphasize what to do instead. That is: How to analyze code quality and where to learn about web scripting. The article should not simply turn the reader away from a one library, only to leave him directionless or jumping to another library (as many ex-prototype.js users switched to jQuery). Garrett |