Hello,
I would like to use a javascript library to simplify my coding
process.
I know a few: JQuery, Dojo, Yahoo UI, ...
Which one do you advice me to use?
Thanks,
Miguel
Oct 29 '07
61  3107 
On Dec 4, 11:34 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
On Nov 1, 9:05 pm, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:
On Nov 1, 5:21 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
Actually it does. When you create an input element, it starts off as
a text element.
Only if you don't create it as one to begin with.
What does that mean? MS extensions aside, you can't magically set the
type attribute on creation.
You have to change its type to create a radio
button.
Which you can do only once.
See the previous post.
If you don't do it exactly right, you will get a non-working
radio button.
It's not as tricky as you make it sound.
What is tricky about doing it right? In a nutshell, set the name
property first. Of course, the name property won't populate the
elements collection of the parent form (assuming there is one),
without a workaround (see the previous post.)
You must be a lousy "Googler." The first hit that comes up has most
of the answers you seek.
Negative.
Then you either can't read or are just trying to string out this
ridiculous "argument."
I can replace the outerHTML of the element, obviously. But that just
creates a new element. It doesn't change the type of the existing
Semantics aside, it does exactly what you need.
It's not semantics. It creates a new object, rather than modifying an
existing one. Further, the outerHTML of an element in IE is not a fair
representation of how it was constructed in the source.
It is semantics. See the previous post. And who said you should use
the outerHTML property to construct the replacement markup? You don't
need to read it, just loop through the specified attributes (assuming
you have a competent getAttribute wrapper) and build the string
yourself.
Don't worry David, I got your back! I'll put these jerks in their
place
Yo guys, I don't care if it works in 99% of all browsers, I don't care
how much time or money I waste, at least I won't have to debug them
when all the browsers suddenly decide to drop their backwards-
capability and 99% of all sites crash, except mine and David's! Whose
gonna get all the hits then?? And I don't care if 90% of developers,
including "experts" like John Resig and huge corporations like Google
and IBM (who are they anyway?) use them, they're all wrong, me and
David got this javascript thing down, we get it, we know it. I mean
just because you practically invented the language doesn't mean you
know it. James Naismith was good a basketball was he?
On Dec 4, 11:34 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
On Nov 1, 9:05 pm, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:
On Nov 1, 5:21 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
Actually it does. When you create an input element, it starts off as
a text element.
Only if you don't create it as one to begin with.
What does that mean? MS extensions aside, you can't magically set the
type attribute on creation.
You have to change its type to create a radio
button.
Which you can do only once.
See the previous post.
If you don't do it exactly right, you will get a non-working
radio button.
It's not as tricky as you make it sound.
What is tricky about doing it right? In a nutshell, set the name
property first. Of course, the name property won't populate the
elements collection of the parent form (assuming there is one),
without a workaround (see the previous post.)
You must be a lousy "Googler." The first hit that comes up has most
of the answers you seek.
Negative.
Then you either can't read or are just trying to string out this
ridiculous "argument."
I can replace the outerHTML of the element, obviously. But that just
creates a new element. It doesn't change the type of the existing
Semantics aside, it does exactly what you need.
It's not semantics. It creates a new object, rather than modifying an
existing one. Further, the outerHTML of an element in IE is not a fair
representation of how it was constructed in the source.
It is semantics. See the previous post. And who said you should use
the outerHTML property to construct the replacement markup? You don't
need to read it, just loop through the specified attributes (assuming
you have a competent getAttribute wrapper) and build the string
yourself.
Don't worry David, I got your back! I'll put these jerks in their
place
Yo guys, I don't care if it works in 99% of all browsers, I don't care
how much time or money I waste, at least I won't have to debug them
when all the browsers suddenly decide to drop their backwards-
capability and 99% of all sites crash, except mine and David's! Whose
gonna get all the hits then?? And I don't care if 90% of developers,
including "experts" like John Resig and huge corporations like Google
and IBM (who are they anyway?) use them, they're all wrong, me and
David got this javascript thing down, we get it, we know it. I mean
just because you practically invented the language doesn't mean you
know it. James Naismith wasn't a good basketball player was he?
On Dec 4, 11:46 am, Rozzy <rozm...@gmail. comwrote:
On Dec 4, 11:34 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
On Nov 1, 9:05 pm, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:
On Nov 1, 5:21 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
Actually it does. When you create an input element, it starts off as
a text element.
Only if you don't create it as one to begin with.
What does that mean? MS extensions aside, you can't magically set the
type attribute on creation.
You have to change its type to create a radio
button.
Which you can do only once.
See the previous post.
If you don't do it exactly right, you will get a non-working
radio button.
It's not as tricky as you make it sound.
What is tricky about doing it right? In a nutshell, set the name
property first. Of course, the name property won't populate the
elements collection of the parent form (assuming there is one),
without a workaround (see the previous post.)
You must be a lousy "Googler." The first hit that comes up has most
of the answers you seek.
Negative.
Then you either can't read or are just trying to string out this
ridiculous "argument."
I can replace the outerHTML of the element, obviously. But that just
creates a new element. It doesn't change the type of the existing
Semantics aside, it does exactly what you need.
It's not semantics. It creates a new object, rather than modifying an
existing one. Further, the outerHTML of an element in IE is not a fair
representation of how it was constructed in the source.
It is semantics. See the previous post. And who said you should use
the outerHTML property to construct the replacement markup? You don't
need to read it, just loop through the specified attributes (assuming
you have a competent getAttribute wrapper) and build the string
yourself.
Don't worry David, I got your back! I'll put these jerks in their
place
Yo guys, I don't care if it works in 99% of all browsers, I don't care
how much time or money I waste, at least I won't have to debug them
when all the browsers suddenly decide to drop their backwards-
capability and 99% of all sites crash, except mine and David's! Whose
gonna get all the hits then?? And I don't care if 90% of developers,
including "experts" like John Resig and huge corporations like Google
and IBM (who are they anyway?) use them, they're all wrong, me and
David got this javascript thing down, we get it, we know it. I mean
just because you practically invented the language doesn't mean you
know it. James Naismith wasn't a good basketball player was he?
Some people strive for excellence and constantly improvement. Others
are happy with mediocrity because it is good enough for everyone else.
Peter
On Dec 4, 12:32 pm, Rozzy <rozm...@gmail. comwrote:
On Dec 4, 3:16 pm, Peter Michaux <petermich...@g mail.comwrote:
Some people strive for excellence and constantly improvement. Others
are happy with mediocrity because it is good enough for everyone else.
Peter
Holy shit are you defending him,
It was a general comment.
Peter
Peter Michaux said the following on 12/4/2007 3:16 PM:
<snip>
Some people strive for excellence and constantly improvement. Others
are happy with mediocrity because it is good enough for everyone else.
I think you failed to catch the sarcasm and irony in it.
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
On Dec 4, 12:41 pm, Peter Michaux <petermich...@g mail.comwrote:
On Dec 4, 12:32 pm, Rozzy <rozm...@gmail. comwrote:
On Dec 4, 3:16 pm, Peter Michaux <petermich...@g mail.comwrote:
Some people strive for excellence and constantly improvement. Others
are happy with mediocrity because it is good enough for everyone else.
Peter
Holy shit are you defending him,
It was a general comment.
It was not directed at Matt.
Peter
On Dec 4, 2:46 pm, Rozzy <rozm...@gmail. comwrote:
On Dec 4, 11:34 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
On Nov 1, 9:05 pm, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:
On Nov 1, 5:21 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:
Actually it does. When you create an input element, it starts off as
a text element.
Only if you don't create it as one to begin with.
What does that mean? MS extensions aside, you can't magically set the
type attribute on creation.
You have to change its type to create a radio
button.
Which you can do only once.
See the previous post.
If you don't do it exactly right, you will get a non-working
radio button.
It's not as tricky as you make it sound.
What is tricky about doing it right? In a nutshell, set the name
property first. Of course, the name property won't populate the
elements collection of the parent form (assuming there is one),
without a workaround (see the previous post.)
You must be a lousy "Googler." The first hit that comes up has most
of the answers you seek.
Negative.
Then you either can't read or are just trying to string out this
ridiculous "argument."
I can replace the outerHTML of the element, obviously. But that just
creates a new element. It doesn't change the type of the existing
Semantics aside, it does exactly what you need.
It's not semantics. It creates a new object, rather than modifying an
existing one. Further, the outerHTML of an element in IE is not a fair
representation of how it was constructed in the source.
It is semantics. See the previous post. And who said you should use
the outerHTML property to construct the replacement markup? You don't
need to read it, just loop through the specified attributes (assuming
you have a competent getAttribute wrapper) and build the string
yourself.
Don't worry David, I got your back! I'll put these jerks in their
place
Put who where? From the looks of it, most people posting to and
reading this thread agree with me.
>
Yo guys, I don't care if it works in 99% of all browsers, I don't care
What works in 99% of all browsers?
how much time or money I waste, at least I won't have to debug them
when all the browsers suddenly decide to drop their backwards-
capability and 99% of all sites crash, except mine and David's! Whose
Oh I get it now. You are an idiot. And from the "JavaScript Forum"
no less. I recommend you go back.
gonna get all the hits then?? And I don't care if 90% of developers,
including "experts" like John Resig and huge corporations like Google
and IBM (who are they anyway?) use them, they're all wrong, me and
Google and John Resig are JavaScript experts?! Really?
David got this javascript thing down, we get it, we know it. I mean
just because you practically invented the language doesn't mean you
Who practically invented the language? John Resig? You are out of
your tiny little mind.
On Dec 4, 4:19 pm, Randy Webb <HikksNotAtH... @aol.comwrote:
Peter Michaux said the following on 12/4/2007 3:16 PM:
<snip>
Some people strive for excellence and constantly improvement. Others
are happy with mediocrity because it is good enough for everyone else.
I think you failed to catch the sarcasm and irony in it.
It would be hard to miss the sarcasm. The irony is that most of the
jQuery muppets think that their library works with "99% of all
browsers" and that it must be good because, after all, Google uses it.
(!)
Speaking of irony, a trip to the jQuery developer group reveals that
some of the issues raised here were debated (ad nauseum) and finally
pushed through. Others were ignored or shouted down with ludicrous
comments like "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." IIRC, that was in
response to the text node event target issue, which was described as a
"Safari bug" (it is neither.) Few over there seem to grasp that their
code will break constantly as browsers fix bugs and introduce new
ones. Why anybody would use code written by such people is beyond
me. Why they would bother trying to defend it here is an even greater
mystery.
BTW, where is the latest HikkScript test page? I was working on
something recently that used Ajax and innerHTML to update elements
periodically and it needed to have inline script execute (which seemed
like a silly idea to me.) I didn't have time to wade through the
hundreds of recent posts on the subject, so I recreated what I
remembered as the best strategy. I'd like to compare it to the
definitive version that has been tested on all of the weird Mac
browsers, etc.
On Dec 5, 8:17 am, Rozzy <rozm...@gmail. comwrote:
[snip]
>
btw, Randy Webb, nice job backing down from your response, "it was a
general comment", and then coming back later with your attempted
Idiot. Peter said that and I doubt he meant it as a vote of
confidence for your nonsensical ramblings.
On Oct 30, 1:46 pm, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:
What would be your recommendation? I see some possibilities:
1. Use a freely-available library that isn't perfect, but has lots of
examples, speeds up development, and doesn't appear to break in any
cases
2. Write everything from scratch, which might be lower quality than
the libraries and take too long
3. Hire a competent developer to write everything from scratch, which
again might take too long and may not be an option financially
4. Make a post to comp.lang.javas cript asking which library to use and
be told that they all suck, and awesome library code exists but you
can't have it.
5. ???
In a real case like this, how would you recommend that people proceed?
Matt Kruse
I have looked at all the libraries that have been mentioned here plus
mootools and scriptaculous. I use YUI now because a.) I know exactly
what it will give me (trees, menus, dialogs, and a pretty nice AJAX
wrapper and most importantly, it will not obfuscate the javascript
language) b.) people on this group haven't totally dissed it.
I am unable to see what the other libraries will give me. Could you
list (for me and the OP) what specific benefits jQuery, for example
will give me. I'm not angling here. If there is a great benefit I am
missing then I will switch over and damn the obfuscation and
"terrible" code.
Bob This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: sagar |
last post by:
Hello friends,
I am developing a AJAX based IM application. For this is need a
Javascript Library to built iframe/div based dragable windows in a
page. I will need multiple windows (for chat, offline users, online
users) in the same page.
Can some one suggest a Javascript library which can be used for my
project.
|
by: leifwessman |
last post by:
Google Analytics are using a encrypted JavaScript library to send and
read 1st party cookies using. The JS library can be found here
http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js
Is there a free JS library available somewhere that mimics this
behaviour? I would be very interested in how Google Analytics does the
magic...
More info here:
http://www.google.com/support/urchin45/bin/answer.py?answer=28710
|
by: kartheek |
last post by:
hi friends,
can any one out here help me by giving me the code to connect to an MSACCESS database using javascript.
|
by: pantagruel |
last post by:
Hi,
I'm thinking of making a WScript based JavaScript library, I can think
of some specific non-browser specific scripting examples that should
probably make it in, like Crockford's little JavaScripter, can anyone
think of anything else. Is anyone familiar with anything similar
already done.
Things that I am thinking that to provide are:
|
by: Lobo |
last post by:
I'm wondering how expensive and (in)efficient is to use Collection
type javascript library functions (similar to using Blocks), instead
of repeating the 'for' iterator over and over across a large
application.
I'm afraid that instantiating javascript Functions to act as Blocks in
these cases might require many more internal javascript resources
(time / memory) compared to using the 'for' statement - ?.
I would not want this to be the...
| | |
by: SagarDoke |
last post by:
i am using ext js - javascript library. i wrote a program using ext class. when i was executing it, it was giving error, that ext class is not found. then how can i set the path of ext class. or there is any other way to implement this js file?
|
by: Aaron Gray |
last post by:
From what I have been looking at for Javascript library development,
browsers that support Javascript 1.5/ECMAScript 3/JScript 5.5 looks like the
base level to pitch at.
Anyone add anything ?
Aaron
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed.
This is as boiled down as I can make it.
Here is my compilation command:
g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp
Here is the code in...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
| | |
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
|
by: conductexam |
last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one.
At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image.
Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
|
by: TSSRALBI |
last post by:
Hello
I'm a network technician in training and I need your help.
I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs.
The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols.
I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
| |
